The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  May 2001

  May 1:

   NASA's 29-Year-Old Pioneer Spacecraft Phones Home - Steven L. Wilson,
   Sr [53]
   Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'? - Diane Harrison
   Director AUFORN [81]
   Re: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - - Sue Strickland [105]
   Eras News: 05-01-01 - The 'Face on Mars', in - Paul Anderson [45]
   'You Can't Tell the People' - A Review - Roy J Hale [6]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [217]
   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch - Larry Hatch [75]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch - Donald . Ledger [160]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [56]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [50]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - - Jim Deardorff [95]

  May 2:

   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Clarke - Dave Clarke [24]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [49]
   Low Flying Triangular Objects: An Addendum Report - Colm Kelleher -
   NIDS [36]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Velez - John Velez [166]
   Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Jesus Millan Arias [9]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow - Greg Sandow [21]
   Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Murray - Marty Murray [67]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [16]
   A Web Archive For Ufology? - Bob Young [12]
   Filer's Files #18 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [412]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [29]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [29]
   Disclosure Project Press Release - Stephen G. Bassett [70]
   CCCRN News: 05-01-01 Research Assistance 2001 - Paul Anderson [69]
   Roswell Piece - Tim Haley [27]
   Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Ticchetti - Thiago L. Ticchetti
   [13]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger - Don Ledger [26]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [64]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - - Richard Hall [44]
   Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Sandow - Greg Sandow [53]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton - David Bolton [48]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [96]

  May 3:

   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [22]
   Secrecy News -- 05/02/01 - Steven Aftergood [159]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff
   [27]
   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch - Larry Hatch [37]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall - Richard Hall [35]
   The Watchdog - 02-05-01 - Royce J. Myers III [24]
   Re: Roswell Piece - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [20]
   More Occam - Greg Sandow [152]
   Re: Roswell Piece - Carr - Scott C. Carr [26]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [48]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [43]
   Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'? - Diane Harrison -
   AUFORN [28]
   Re: Serious Research - EagleBoy - Ron EagleBoy [72]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [40]
   Re: Roswell Piece - Friedman - Stan Friedman [43]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [26]
   Re: Roswell Piece - Sawers - William Sawers [18]
   Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Furlotte - David Furlotte [30]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [130]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff
   [66]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [55]
   Re: UFO Polls & Surveys - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [39]
   Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Young - Bob Young [29]
   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young - Bob Young [19]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18 - John Hayes [487]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [48]
   Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels" - Kelly [177]
   Re: Roswell Piece - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [95]
   Re: Serious Research - Clark - Jerome Clark [63]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [49]
   Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'? - Bob Young [11]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle - Kevin Randle [65]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [67]
   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Randles - Jenny Randles [119]

  May 4:

   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [35]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [22]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [130]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow - Greg Sandow [44]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Velez - John Velez [108]
   Re: More Occam - Hall - Richard Hall [31]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [148]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall - Richard Hall [66]
   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hall - Richard Hall [21]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [81]
   More Lords Q & A On Rendlesham Case - Georgina Bruni [41]
   The Real X-Files - 05-01-01 - Georgina Bruni [217]
   Nick Pope's Weird World - 05-01-01 - Georgina Bruni [123]
   Cydonian Imperative: 05-03-01 - Pyramid on Phobos? - Mac Tonnies [27]
   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Sawers - William Sawers
   [44]
   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hatch - Larry Hatch [50]
   Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [44]
   An Odd Question - Jenny Randles [28]
   Italian TV UFO Program - Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc [59]
   Kean On Pilot Encounters - UFO UpDates - Toronto [144]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [50]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [101]
   PRG Update - 05-04-01 - Stephen G. Bassett [68]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [76]

  May 5:

   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen - Sue Strickland [53]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [61]
   Re: Serious Research - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [35]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton - David Bolton [24]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #348 - Alfred Lehmberg [118]
   Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - Velez - John Velez [70]
   Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - - Sue Strickland [68]
   Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs... - Ron Cecchini [10]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - James Easton [27]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Robert Gates RGates8254@aol.com>
   [23]
   Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain - Hatch - Larry Hatch [38]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [32]
   Re: More Occam - Jones - Sean Jones [28]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [93]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Ledger - Don Ledger [14]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Young - Bob Young [36]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [13]
   Greer On Bell - Larry Hatch [39]
   C.E.: Dr Reed and Robert Raith - Peter B. Davenport [80]
   Re: Italian TV UFO Program - Lissoni - Alfredo Lissoni [27]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks - Brad Sparks [34]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [47]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [38]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle - Kevin Randle [41]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [54]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [30]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [41]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [37]
   Re: Serious Research - Sandow - Greg Sandow [53]
   Re: More Occam - Sandow - Greg Sandow [24]
   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [91]

  May 6:

   Just Clark/e-ing Around [was: Debunkers' Guidebook] - Jim Mortellaro
   [19]
   Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - McCoy - GT McCoy [115]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [50]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [47]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [176]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [31]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [18]
   New Articles At The Lost Haven - Roy J Hale [25]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Velez - John Velez [66]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Velez - John Velez [69]
   Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Aubeck - Chris Aubeck [49]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [36]
   S.I.B. Announces Project COTA - Scott Corrales [105]
   Nothing New Under The Sun... - John Rimmer [20]
   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen - Kelly [103]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [81]
   Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Ed Gehrman [467]
   Re: More Occam - Skavhaug - Asgeir W. Skavhaug [83]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Stan Friedman [105]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger - Don Ledger [56]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [44]
   Eras News: 05-07-01 Cattle Mute Lecture - Paul Anderson [46]

  May 7:

   Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [58]
   Re: Serious Research - Sawers - William Sawers [76]
   Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain - Scott Corrales [25]
   Ravenna 1966 - Richard Hall [29]
   The Smouldering Dud 'Debris' - GT McCoy [33]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Don Ledger [51]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Bobbie Felder [88]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall - Richard Hall [61]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [27]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [48]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [64]
   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Ledger - Don Ledger [24]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [248]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [52]
   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hale - Roy J Hale [13]
   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale - Roy J Hale [11]
   Re: Serious Research - Hale - Roy J Hale [12]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18 - Hale - Roy J Hale [18]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale - Roy J Hale [15]
   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hale - Roy J Hale [21]
   Re: Filer's Files #18 -- 2000 - Hale - Roy J Hale [16]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [110]
   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Hale - Roy J Hale [21]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [26]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow - Greg Sandow [44]
   Re: Serious Research - Sandow - Greg Sandow [33]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [36]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [26]
   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Clark - Jerome Clark [29]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Friedman - Stan Friedman [38]

  May 8:

   'NICAP UFO Investigators' Needed - Rod Dyke [55]
   THE WATCHDOG - 05-07-01 - Royce J. Myers III [25]
   Re: Serious Research - Clark - Jerome Clark [45]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Ledger - Don Ledger [19]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall - Richard Hall [36]
   Re: Serious Research - Velez - John Velez [70]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman - Stan Friedman [70]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [44]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [58]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Hatch - Larry Hatch [53]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [52]
   Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch - Larry Hatch [34]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [57]
   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [27]
   Filer's Files #19 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [438]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Kelly - Kelly [68]
   Budd Hopkins' IF Seminar Announcement - 5/19/01 - Intruders Foundation
   [62]

  May 9:

   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Gates - Robert Gates [31]
   Re: S.I.B. Announces Project COTA - Hatch - Larry Hatch [25]
   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Gates - Robert Gates [26]

  May 10:

   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [44]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Velez - John Velez [80]
   Space Defense Initiative - Tim Haley [32]
   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Strickland - Sue Strickland [114]
   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Sadowski - Scott Sadowski [28]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [34]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [77]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [23]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow - Greg Sandow [35]
   Cydonian Imperative: 05-08-01 Anomalous "Ring" - Mac Tonnies [20]
   Re: Just Clark/e-ing Around - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [24]
   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [30]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [46]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [32]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Deschamps - Michel M. Deschamps [31]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawwers - William Sawers [69]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [38]
   Re: Secrecy News -- 02/09/01 - Steven Aftergood [82]
   CCCRN News: Millennium Research Report on 'Ice - Paul Anderson [189]
   BBC - National Press Club UFO Conference - Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc
   [61]
   Contest For The Best Piece - Jim Mortellaro [59]
   Secrecy Item Excerpt - Robert Gates [72]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [64]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 19 - John Hayes [380]

  May 11:

   Greer Press Conference - Richard Hall [15]
   WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus - GT McCoy [7]
   Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Georgina Bruni [109]
   X-PPAC Update - 05-10-01 - Stephen G. Bassett [56]
   Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - John Velez [25]
   NewsNet5 - Woman Learned How To Kill As A Child - GT McCoy [7]
   Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [89]
   Re: Space Defense Initiative - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [39]
   THE WATCHDOG - 05-10-01 - Royce J. Myers III [20]
   Roswell Debris Crashes - UFO UpDates - Toronto [49]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [55]
   Disclosure Project Press Conference - Bassett - Steve G. Bassett
   SGBList2@aol.com [18]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Bott - Murray Bott [24]
   Disclosure Project, Filer & Stone - Philip Mantle [9]
   Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face" - Mac Tonnies [87]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [27]
   Greer Press Conference - Kevin Randle [110]
   Re: Roswell Debris Crashes - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [48]
   Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - -
   skywatcher22@space.com [24]
   Re: Greer Press Conference - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [30]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg
   [80]
   Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Easton - James Easton [260]
   Re: WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus - McCoy - GT McCoy [17]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Easton - James Easton [5]
   Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - - GT McCoy [34]
   Greer'S Ironic Fate - Richard Hall [20]
   Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder - Bobbie Felder [42]
   Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Young - YoungBob2@aol.com [25]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark - Jerome Clark [36]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Hale - Roy J Hale [28]
   Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face" - Roy J Hale [33]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale - Roy J Hale [17]
   Project Disclosure & Greer - Don Ecker [213]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [37]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez - John Velez [54]

  May 12:

   Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face" - Mac Tonnies [24]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez - John Velez [69]
   Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [68]
   Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Velez - John Velez [56]
   Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch - Larry Hatch [84]
   Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - - Larry Hatch [65]
   Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Bruni - Georgina Bruni
   [100]
   UFO Claim Slips Away - Akron Report Not Verified - Kenny Young [177]
   Disclosure Project Support - Darren Danks [51]
   Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Hatch - Larry Hatch [19]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch - Larry Hatch [72]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke - Dave Clarke [39]
   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton - skywatcher22@space.com [21]
   Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - -
   skywatcher22@space.com [44]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #349 - Alfred Lehmberg [126]
   Ufology UK Online Competition - Joe McGonagle [58]
   Space - A Military Priority - Osley Dias [81]
   Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Sadowski - Scott Sadowski [31]
   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Bourdais - Gildas Bourdais [45]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman - Stan Friedman
   [105]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [59]
   Re: Greer Press Conference - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [40]
   Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [45]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder - Bobbie Felder [36]

  May 13:

   Edgar Mitchell Not Disclosure Witness - UFO UpDates - Toronto [51]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Young - Bob [24]
   OK How About This....? - Bobbie Felder [43]
   Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder - Bobbie Felder [44]
   On Greer Or Off Him - Jim Mortellaro [28]

  May 14:

   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [61]
   Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - An Entrance To The - Mac Tonnies [49]
   Re: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker - Don Ecker [29]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Velez - John Velez [55]
   Cover Up At The Disclosure Project? - Jan Aldrich [10]
   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker - Don Ecker [53]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez - John Velez [153]
   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Strickland - Sue Strickland [22]
   Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Hall - Richard Hall [35]
   Re: On Greer Or Off Him - Sanchez-Ocejo - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
   [20]
   Re: OK How About This....? - Velez - John Velez [83]
   Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton - David Bolton [13]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow - Greg Sandow [50]
   Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy - GT McCoy [90]
   CCCRN News: 05-13-01 First European Crop Formation - Paul Anderson [29]
   Gordon Or Not Gordon? - David Bolton [43]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Harrison - Diane Harrison - AUFORN
   [55]
   The Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - Update! - Mac Tonnies [49]
   A Wasted Greer Press Conference - Josh Goldstein [61]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [46]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [63]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Robert Gates [28]
   Re: OK How About This....? - Randle - Kevin Randle [103]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle - Kevin Randle [58]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Randle - Kevin Randle [118]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale - Roy J Hale [55]
   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder - Bobbie Felder [68]
   Re: OK How About This - Felder - Bobbie Felder [42]
   Re: OK How About This....? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [33]
   Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Richard Hall [50]
   Re: OK How About This - Geib - Dan Geib [44]
   Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Aubeck - Chris Aubeck [64]

  May 15:

   Re: OK How About This...? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [103]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Hall - Richard Hall [68]

  May 14:

   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [28]
   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [29]
   Re: Space - A Military Priority - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [16]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Bob Young [27]
   Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [83]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [103]
   Re: OK How About This - Velez - John Velez [62]
   Re: OK How About This - Hatch - Larry Hatch [68]
   Corso And The Shickshinny Knights - Jan Aldrich [13]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks - Brad Sparks [45]
   Greer Bits - Bobbie Felder [253]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sparks - Brad Sparks [41]
   The Watchdog - 05-1401 - Royce J. Myers III [12]
   Just Think Of It - Dan Geib [34]
   Cydonian Imperative: o5-15-01 - More on the 'Fort' - Mac Tonnies [57]

  May 15:

   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers - William Sawers [85]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers - William Sawers [13]
   Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' - James Easton [103]
   Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Sawers - William Sawers [34]
   Re: OK How About This....? - Gates - Robert Gates [43]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Cammack - Diana Cammack [52]
   Porto Symposium - October 2001 - Joaquim Fernandes [94]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Geib - Dan Geib geibdan@qtm.net [46]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Felder - Bobbie Felder [69]
   Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy - GT McCoy [86]
   Re: K How About This - Felder - Bobbie Felder [40]
   Talk And Action - Richard Hall [43]
   Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Young - Bob Young [38]
   IFO Database Online - Bobbie Felder [14]
   Re: Gordon Or Not Gordon? - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [97]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [14]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [62]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Clark - Jerome Clark [44]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Dave Clarke [57]
   Secrecy News -- 05/15/01 - Steven Aftergood [144]
   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [40]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [41]
   Plunkett And The Beasts - "Bill Chalker" [42]

  May 16:

   Rogue River Sighting - Bruce Maccabee [12]
   Scotland FT Article - Roy J Hale [19]
   'Chupacabras' Attack Pregnant Dog - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [15]
   PRG Press Release - 05/17/01 - Paradigm Clock Reset - Steve Bassett
   [82]
   Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs? - Joe McGonagle [11]
   Birnes On Corso - CNI News - 06-16-97 - Ed Gehrman [175]

  May 17:

   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young - Bob Young [18]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young - Bob Young [32]
   EW News: 05-17-01 The Allies of Humanity - Kurt Jonach [191]
   COMETA Media Coverage? - Haiko Lietz [47]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 20 - John Hayes [322]
   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Sparks - Brad Sparks [32]
   Secrecy News -- 05/17/01 - Steven Aftergood [86]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [79]
   Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [44]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [112]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch - Larry Hatch [31]

  May 18:

   Re: Just Think Of It - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [41]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Robert Gates [104]
   Re: Talk And Action - Chalker - Bill Chalker [58]
   Re: Talk And Action - Easton - James Easton [87]
   EW UFO & ETI News Update - 05-18-01 - Kurt Jonach [59]
   Cydonian Imperative: 05-18-01 - Another Triangle - Mac Tonnies [24]
   Re: Talk And Action - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [90]
   Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly [10]
   Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' - - Jan Aldrich [124]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - van Gemert - Jean van Gemert [53]
   Re: Talk And Action - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [81]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Randle - Kevin Randle [57]
   Jaime Maussan? - Royce J. Myers [10]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [29]
   Re: IFO Database Online - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [15]
   Re: Talk And Action - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [52]
   Average Rate Of UFO Reports Per Minute - Nick Balaskas [28]
   Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Chris Aubeck [113]
   N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947 - UFO UpDates - Toronto [104]
   Re: OK How About This...? - Randles - Jenny Randles [116]
   Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [44]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [62]
   Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire - Dave Clarke [57]
   Re: Talk And Action - Friedman - Stan Friedman [78]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman - Stan Friedman [32]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [36]
   Talk And Action - Felder - Bobbie Felder [32]
   Filer's Files #20 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [466]
   Re: ncient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Anthony - Gary Anthony [39]

  May 19:

   Re: Talk And Action - Hall - Richard Hall [85]
   Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck - Chris Aubeck [37]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly - Kelly [28]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [60]
   Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Easton - James Easton [22]
   Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck - Chris Aubeck [23]
   Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman - Stan Friedman
   [85]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - 1966 - Larry Hatch [64]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [156]
   UFO Book Sale - royjhale [15]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - [burp] - Larry Hatch [26]
   Astrobiology: The Search For ETI - Kelly [145]
   Re: N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947 - Hatch - Larry Hatch [17]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch - Larry Hatch [44]
   Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' - - Bruce Maccabee [99]
   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton - David Bolton [19]
   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton - David Bolton [30]
   Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire - Bolton - David Boltona [14]
   Wernher von Braun & Team, Photo - Kurt Jonach [70]
   Eras News: 05-19-01 - NASA's Cydonia Response - Paul Anderson [148]
   Re: Talk And Action - Velez - John Velez [36]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman - Stan Friedman [38]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman - Stan Friedman [83]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle - Kevin Randle [126]
   'The 400' - UFO UpDates - Toronto [501]

  May 20:

   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly - Kelly [61]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly - Kelly [46]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [58]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [31]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [101]
   Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [34]
   The Legend of the Dropa - Chris Aubeck [212]
   Re Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [110]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [23]

  May 21:

   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Alfred Lehmberg [234]
   Re: Talk And Action - Richard Hall [77]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle - Kevin Randle [117]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [19]
   CCCRN News: New Network Assistants - Paul Anderson [81]
   Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Hatch - Larry Hatch [43]
   Civilian To Purchase Seat Aboard First Manned Mars - Mac Tonnies [40]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch - Larry Hatch [71]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [33]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young - Bob Young [64]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young - Bob Young [37]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [76]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates - Robert Gates [106]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [35]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [33]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman - Stan Friedman [199]

  May 22:

   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale - Roy J Hale [10]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [78]
   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Aubeck - Chris Aubeck [52]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [47]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall - Richard Hall [67]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther - Daniel Guenther [22]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark - Jerome Clark [59]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark - Jerome Clark [59]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow - Greg Sandow [25]
   The Watchdog - 05-21-01 - Royce J. Myers III [17]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [41]
   Nick Balaskas on City-TV - Another View - Michael J. Woods [31]
   Re: orso's FBI Files Revisited - Gerhman - Ed Gehrman [86]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [49]

  May 23:

   Re: Serious Research - Velez - John Velez [103]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - van Gemert - Jean van Gemert [43]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [130]
   Magazine Sale - Roy J Hale [15]
   Chile: Baquedano y Sierra Gorda Chupacabra Evidence - Scott Corrales
   [22]
   Re: Talk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [44]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark - Jerome Clark [42]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder - Bobbie Felder [43]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young - Bob Young [16]
   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Anthony - Gary Anthony [74]
   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young - Bob Young [19]
   Secrecy News -- 05/22/01 - Steven Aftergood [189]
   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [73]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch - Larry Hatch [35]
   Re: Talk And Action - Hall - Richard Hall [103]
   New Karl Pflock Book - Karl T. Pflock [28]

  May 24:

   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [56]
   Crop Formations and F&M - Tim Haley [15]
   The Barnaul Sighting - Paul Stonehill [28]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [64]
   Filer's Files #21 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [458]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young - Bob Young [81]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks - Brad Sparks [108]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles - Jenny Randles [52]
   Florida Today's Billy Cox On Disclosure Project - Stan Friedman [7]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall - Richard Hall [39]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman - Stan Friedman [69]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [51]
   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Chris Aubeck [76]
   Re: Serious Research - Clark - Jerome Clark [78]
   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Roy J Hale [18]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young - Bob Young [42]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [50]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [105]
   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg - Jim Mortellaro [106]
   Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Sparks - Brad Sparks [51]
   NASA Press Conference On New Mars Face Image - Lan Fleming [16]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [88]
   Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [18]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [113]
   Cydonian Imperative: 05-24-01 NASA to Address - Mac Tonnies [20]
   Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Jim Mortellaro [61]
   Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [147]
   Re: Serious Research - Sawers - William Sawers [60]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Robert Gates [52]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers - William Sawers [59]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder - Bobbie Felder [35]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle - Kevin Randle [134]
   Did You Make The List? - Bobbie Felder [829]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark - Jerome Clark [80]
   Re: Talk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [55]
   Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young - Bob Young [20]
   Evidence First - What Of Experience Or Disclosure? -
   skywatcher22@space.com [51]
   Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Clark - Jerome Clark [27]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder - Bobbie Felder [44]
   Re: Serious Research - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [33]
   Re: Serious Research - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille" [14]
   UFO ROUNDUP Delayed - John Hayes [14]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Sparks - Brad Sparks RB47Expert@aol.com [49]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks - Brad Sparks [71]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [61]
   New 'Face' Pictures At JPL Site - UFO UpDates - Toronto [4]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall - Richard Hall [48]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [29]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger - Donald Ledger [110]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Hall - Richard Hall [31]

  May 25:

   New UFO/Police Tapes: Ohio Incident April 24, 2001 - Kenny Young [605]
   Re: Serious Research - Velez - John Velez [218]
   THE WATCHDOG - 05-24-01 - Royce J. Myers III [12]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton - James Easton [141]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [88]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [19]
   1968 Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects - - James Easton [49]
   Re: Evidence First...Experience Or Disclosure? - - John Velez [81]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch - Larry Hatch [55]
   2001 Mars Face Ends Speculation, Invites Inquiry - Kurt Jonach [86]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [48]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle - Kevin Randle [209]

  May 26:

   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [124]
   Re: Talk And Action - Hall - Richard Hall [88]
   Re: Serious Research - Hall - Richard Hall [68]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Rudiak - David Rudiak [135]
   Re: Serious Research - Felder - Bobbie Felder [97]
   Abductee's Books & Investigators - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [50]
   Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [31]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [63]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [41]
   Re: Serious Research - Young - Bob Young [17]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [66]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [14]
   Sheaffer Vs. The 'Chupacabras' - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [74]
   Re: Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [28]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [27]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman - Stan Friedman [110]
   Re: alk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [41]
   Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [40]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [22]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark - Jerome Clark [39]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [143]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 21 - John Hayes [409]

  May 27:

   Alfred's Odd Ode #350 - Alfred Lehmberg [87]
   International UFO Research Day - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [10]
   Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [40]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton - James Easton [44]
   Re: Talk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [162]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lowe - Adam Lowe [16]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Sparks - Brad Sparks [42]
   Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Richard Hall [16]
   A 16th Century Disc - Chris Aubeck [36]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Brad Sparks [253]
   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Sandow - Greg Sandow [21]
   Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Sandow - Greg Sandow [11]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [200]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [290]
   Menzel's Spectre Returns to Haunt 'Believers' - James Easton [60]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates - Robert Gates [148]

  May 28:

   Re: Serious Research - Sawers - William Sawers [77]
   Re: Greer Press Conference - Gates - Robert Gates [44]
   Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' - - Robert Gates [18]
   Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Robert Gates [13]
   Re: Talk And Action - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [75]
   CCCRN News: 05-27-01 - First 'Circular Forum' - Paul Anderson [41]
   International UFO Research Day Release & Invitation - Dr. Virgilio
   Sanchez-Ocejo [90]
   UFO Courses? - Thiago Ticchetti [9]
   Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs? - - Joe McGonagle [37]
   Eras News: 05-28-01 - New 'Face on Mars' Images - Paul Anderson [84]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow - Greg Sandow [40]
   New At Magonia - 05-28-01 - Mark Pilkington [14]
   Re: International UFO Research Day - Young - Bob Young [20]
   Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' - - Donald Ledger [34]
   Re: Talk And Action - Randle - Kevin Randle [178]

  May 29:

   Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Alfred Lehmberg [278]
   Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Gonzlez - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso
   [31]
   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [31]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [32]
   Article On 6/2000 MBS Face Image - Lan Fleming [32]
   Re: Talk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [22]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark - Jerome Clark [34]
   Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [38]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [110]
   Ravaged In The Corn - Jim Mortellaro [37]
   Re: MGS Imaged _Entire_ Mars Face - Balaskas - Nick Balaskas [47]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [34]
   Re: Talk And Action - Sparks - Brad Sparks [185]
   UFO Sightings OZ Files 29th 5 2001 - Diane Harrison [383]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks - Brad Sparks [377]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther - Daniel Guenther [30]
   Re: Talk And Action - Sparks - Brad Sparks [140]
   Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sawers - Williams Sawers [33]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [67]
   Re: Talk And Action - Sparks - Brad Sparks [106]
   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [50]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Easton - James Easton [126]
   Of Interest To Creative Listers? - Wendy Christensen [37]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young - Bob Young [49]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Talk And Action - Young - Bob Young [43]
   Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Young - Bob Young [20]
   Project 'SIGN' - Initial Report - Daniel Guenther [8]
   Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles - Jenny Randles [60]
   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [29]
   Re: Talk And Action - Clark - Jerome Clark [102]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [27]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [46]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [42]
   Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Velez - John Velez [75]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young - Bob Young [22]
   Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Hall - Richard Hall [282]
   Secrecy News -- 05/29/01 - Steven Aftergood [90]
   Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Jim Mortellaro [29]
   Re: Talk And Action - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [16]

  May 30:

   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Easton - James Easton [110]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark - Jerome Clark [35]
   Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sandow - Greg Sandow [44]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Dennis Stacy [31]
   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso - - Greg Sandow [42]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Rimmer - John Rimmer [28]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Dennis Stacy [79]
   Re: Abductees' Books/Videotaping ET - Katharina Wilson [31]
   Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Greg Sandow [80]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Kevin Randle KRandle993@aol.com [293]
   Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Alfred Lehmberg [39]
   Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Alfred Lehmberg [33]
   Re: Serious Research - William Sawers [45]
   Re: 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200 - William Sawers [63]
   Re: Ravaged In The Corn - William Sawers [63]
   Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Bruce Maccabee [27]
   Re: Ravenna 1966 - Brad Sparks [52]
   Venezuela: Strange Lights In The Sky - Scott Corrales [45]
   Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 [was Re: Debunkers' - David Rudiak [390]
   Filer's Files #22 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [424]
   Tracking Bomb-Size Meteors - Dennis Stacy [6]
   Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs? - Bruce Maccabee [48]
   Re: Talk And Action - Bruce Maccabee [118]
   Re: Talk And Action - Bruce Maccabee [22]
   Re: Talk And Action - Bruce Maccabee [250]
   Puerto Rico: Fear and Loathing in Barceloneta - Scott Corrales [61]
   Cydonian Imperative -05-30-01: The Face - Natural - Mac Tonnies [97]
   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Ed Gehrman [106]
   Re: Talk And Action - Dennis Stacy [49]
   CCRN News: Circle Report #2 - Aldershot, Ontario, - Paul Anderson [35]

  May 31:

   Re: Talk And Action - Brad Sparks [102]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark - Jerome Clark [25]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark - Jerome Clark [45]
   Re: Talk And Action - Hall - Richard Hall [189]
   THE WATCHDOG - 05-31-01 - Royce J. Myers III [18]
   Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Donald . Ledger [145]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [96]
   Re: Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [132]
   Secrecy News -- 05/31/01 - Steven Aftergood [95]
   Re: Talk And Action - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [22]
   Disappointed In Brentwood - Richard Hall [24]
   Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Ed Gehrman [30]





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

              NASA's 29-Year-Old Pioneer Spacecraft Phones Home

From: Steven L. Wilson, Sr <dunlks@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:00:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 00:12:40 -0400
Subject: NASA's 29-Year-Old Pioneer Spacecraft Phones Home


NASA's 29-year-old Pioneer spacecraft phones home


By Deborah Zabarenko


WASHINGTON, April 30 (Reuters) - The Pioneer 10 space probe, launched in 1972
and silent for eight months, phoned home from more than 7 billion miles (11
billion km) away after getting a radio call from Earth, NASA said on Monday.

"We called out on Friday and it took until Saturday for ET to call home,"
said Glenn Mucklow, who deals with interstellar missions at the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration.

"It says, 'I'm still here, alive and well and transmitting data,"' Mucklow
said in a telephone interview.

Pioneer 10 had not made contact since last August, and while NASA scientists
had lost contact before, the silences had only lasted for a week or two,
Mucklow said. Such a long hiatus probably means something has broken down, he
said.

Still, the craft is chugging along at a brisk 27,380 miles (44,060 km) an
hour, far beyond our solar system but not quite out of range of the Sun's
influence, Mucklow said. The electrified gas known as the solar wind can
still reach it.

Pioneer 10, one of a series of unstaffed space probes, was meant to examine
the outer reaches of the solar system. In its heyday, it was the first to go
through the Asteroid Belt, the first to send back pictures of Saturn and
Jupiter and the first to go beyond Pluto.

Designed to last about three years, Pioneer 10's science mission was finally
turned off in 1997. Even though the spacecraft is technically retired, NASA
has used it to train lunar ground controllers, Mucklow said.

Before last August, the craft remained steadfast, periodically beaming
signals to Earth on its own. After that, NASA had to send out a signal via
the Deep Space Network, a system of giant radio telescopes at various points
around the world.

Referring to Pioneer 10 almost as if it were an elderly but generally spry
relative, Mucklow said, "We have to repoint the spacecraft every six months
or two. Every time we do it, we worry."

Worries may be fueled by the extreme distance, which means that it takes 22
hours from the time of sending a signal until Pioneer 10's reply is received,
he said.

Fueled by gradually decaying radioactive material, which produces heat which
is then converted to electricity, Pioneer 10 is expected to arrive at the
constellation Taurus the Bull in two million years or so.

Pioneer 10 is neither the oldest nor the most distant operating NASA
spacecraft, but it is the one bearing a famous gold plaque with the image of
a woman and a man and goodwill information about Earth.

Several Voyager space probes are further away from Earth than Pioneer 10, and
Pioneer 6 was tracked in its orbit around the Sun last December, on the 35th
anniversary of its launch.

18:09 04-30-01

Copyright 2001 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.

Researcher Steven L. Wilson, Sr
To submit paranormal activity email Ndunlks@aol.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 1

              Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 14:51:22 +1000
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:57:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?


 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:00:41 -0400
 >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: http://sightings.com/general10/obz.htm

 >Swiss Radio Says ET Signal Detected By Parkes Observatory In Oz

 >By Gregory Palast <gregory.palast@observer.co.uk>

 >The Observer - London

 > From Rumor Mill News
 >http://www.rumormillnews.net

 >4-29-1

 >Note - The Swiss radio report indicates the signals have been
 >picked up by the Parkes Observatory in Australia. The Swiss
 >site's announcement is in French. -ed

<snip>

Hi everyone, Jeff

This is what I found out

Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

Quote: Carol Oliver of Ceti Australia said: Ceti is not
        involved.

Quote: John Sarkissian of Park Observatory said: theyt're not
        involved.


The story goes like this.

John said: Quote: "Nothing has happened here we have had _no_
signal at all". But he had heard that 2 student's at a Swiss
Science festival in Geneva were quoted as saying that they had
heard that Parks observatory are looking for signals of an
extraterrestrial origin.

John said, quote, "I think the media just misunderstood the
student's and ran with the ET story". He then gave me Carol
Olivers of Ceti Australia Telephone number to call for more
information.

Carol said, quote, "We at Ceti in Australia have not received
any signal of ET origin. However I was tipped off by a science
friend in London last night that the media were running with
the ET signal story over there, so I have been expecting some
phone calls just like yours."

Carol explained and emphasised neither Parks nor Ceti Aust knew
anything of the joke until last night and are in no way
involved.

After speaking with Carol it would appear that the Internet
media are all part of an experiment. "Yes a joke".

Carol informed me that she had heard that all would be revealed
on Friday when a 3 meter high statue of some-kind will be
mounted in a town square in Geneva to end the Festival of
Science.

The joke was to see how fast the media spread the story. Carol
said, "The Australian media have been quite good and have not
participated in the joke much. However Carol pointed out that
our conversation would add to part of the experiment to which we
both light heartedly laughed.

She also point out that her phone had been running hot and she
has been unable to get on with her job. No more calls please.

The only part of the experiment I will admit to is finding out
the validity of the story for everyone out there. So, the Jokes
on the media.... I guess.

Carol's final comment... "Never believe everything you read."

Cheers all

__________

Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 11:23:11 +1000
To: jr-rense.com
From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

Hi Jeff

I'm right on to this one Parks is going to call me today with an
explanation so I will keep you all informed as to the validity
of the information below.

A lady stated, "It would appear the french know more than we at
Parks."





--
Regards

Diane Harrison

National Director
The Australian UFO Research Network
and UFO Hotline.

Tel number 1800 77 22 88 a Free Call
Australian UFO Research Network -
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw


A non profit organisation
P.O Box 805
Springwood Qld 4127








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                Re: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 10:49:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :>
 >Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:59 PM
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?


 >Mary Castner, over on P-47, posted the URL for the following
 >article - she suggested that she: "...thought this article
 >interesting. Also it was suggested a possible genetic connection
 >which might explain why abductions run in some families. It
 >maybe old hat to some of you."

 >Source: MSNBC

 >http://www.msnbc.com/news/566079.asp?cp1=1

 >Mystic Visions Or Brain Circuits At Work?

 >Religion And The Brain

 >In the new field of 'neurotheology', scientists seek the
 >biological basis of spirituality. Is God all in our heads?

 >By Sharon Begley

 >NEWSWEEK

<snip>

 >... Those most open to mystical experience tend also to be
 >open to new experiences generally. They are usually creative
 >and innovative, with a breadth of interests and a tolerance
 >for ambiguity (as determined by questionnaire). They also
 >tend toward fantasy, notes David Wulff, "suggesting a capacity
 >to suspend the judging process that distinguishes imaginings and
 >real events."


Dear Listers & EBK,

This article was enlightening, to say the least. However, many
of the specifics, as well as some of the generalities put forth
in this article do not fit me. I wonder how many other abductees
found this somewhat offensive. Once again, we are prone to
'lumping' or 'splintering' in an effort to grasp some measure of
this phenomena. And, since we have been discussing the ET
experience as 'belief vs. reality', I think I need to chime in
here, as this article relates to that particular issue and to
me, personally.

I've never been known as especially creative nor innovative. As
a matter of fact, my artistic talent lay solely in copying or
providing renditions of others' works from Monet to Rockwell and
Chopin to Stevie W.

As a small child I wanted to feel needed and loved, and I looked
for and found acceptance from many around me, especially adults.
However, I was quick to judge others if I found them acting
strangely. At age 4 I thought everyone else in church was nuts
for singing "Happy Birthday" to a dead person at Christmas time!
However, I was devastated to learn that there was no Santa
Claus... until my grandmother told me the story of St.
Nickolas... and how he got his nickname. (If you say "St.
Nickolas" very fast, you will hear "Sant-ne-claus".) That has
been the extent of any predisposition toward fantasy. Nor do I
have temporal lobe epilepsy.

I can assure the most ardent skeptics on this List that I would
stand beside them, argue and debate in and for defense of their
positions and logic, _if_ I had not experienced the 'night time
visitors' myself, replicated over 10+ years.

I had the brass ____s to call 'them' liars to their face when
they said they were from space. They had to show me their weird
egg-shaped rocketship in the woods, and I had to ride in the
clunky metal thing before I believed them! And even then, I
didn't believe it was all real. I assumed I was dreaming or
hallucinating! No, I do not hallucinate, except perhaps when I'm
dead. And, I've been dead 4 times in the last 20 years.

EBK mentioned that the article suggested a possible genetic
connection. It's true that there seems to be some kind of
familial connection, however, I have yet to define that anamoly.
My grandfather and father were also probable abductees. My
sister was also, although she has no specific memories of the
events, only sensory, olfactory memories.

<snip>

 >Unfortunately, scientists are pretty clueless about what allows
 >subconscious thoughts to pop into the consciousness of some
 >people and not others. The single strongest predictor of such
 >experiences, however, is something called "dissociation." In
 >this state, different regions of the brain disengage from
 >others. "This theory, which explains hypnotizability so well,
 >might explain mystical states, too," says Michael Shermer,
 >director of the Skeptics Society, which debunks paranormal
 >phenomena. "Something really seems to be going on in the brain,
 >with some module dissociating from the rest of the cortex."

I wish I could have 'dissociated' from the pain the moment I was
burnt to the bone by 'their' blankity-blank laser beam... before
'we' invented the laser! I wonder if the human doctor who
examined the burns 2 days later thought I was "dissociating"
from the pain when he found I had no pain at the site of the
burns!

 >One experience common to many spiritual states is hearing the
 >voice of God. It seems to arise when you misattribute inner
 >speech (the "little voice" in your head that you know you
 >generate yourself) to something outside yourself.

That 'little voice' was distinctly male. He asked me, "Sue, do
you really want to die?" It was not my 'inner voice', because I
thought I wanted to die... before I was given the choice.

How do you do this when you're clinically dead? How does one
sense everything around them, see perfectly, hear perfectly,
feel emotions and feelings and yet no pain and be able to
describe everything that happened after awakening... the events,
the conversations people had with one another (while you were
dead and listening). I'm interested in hearing what others have
to say about this.

I think we are missing some basic information here. What do you
all think? Am I just 'splintering' information, or are the
experts 'lumping' everything into one big pot, looking for
simple answers (again).

Frankly, this is _all_ too weird for me to accept.


Sue
Ex-abductee










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                Eras News: 05-01-01 - The 'Face on Mars', in

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:08:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 13:37:33 -0400
Subject: Eras News: 05-01-01 - The 'Face on Mars', in


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

May 1, 2001

____________________________


THE 'FACE ON MARS', IN DORIAN GRAYSCALE


The Air & Space Smithsonian magazine's web site has added a
QuickTime video clip of the 'Face on Mars', featuring an
animated synthesis of the original 70's Viking image with the
later higher resolution image of the landform taken by Mars
Global Surveyor in 1998, referencing the enhancement work done
by Mark Carlotto:

http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Web/Site/QT/DorianFace.html


Also, the latest issue of the Skeptical Inquirer, the magazine
of CSICOP, contains an updated article on the Face by Gary
Posner which actually (finally) admits that NASA's original raw
'catbox' image, taken by Mars Global Surveyor in 1998, is
inaccurate (which many independent researchers like Carlotto
already knew from the beginning). That raw image, not properly
processed to show the Face in its true three-dimensional form,
and instead portrayed it as flat and washed-out looking, was
picked up immediately by many media sources, and subsequently
offered as proof that the Face was only a flattish,
uninteresting mound. The actual, properly rectified image
however, shows the Face to still possess many of the original
face-like characteristics first noted in the Viking photos, and
in more detail. The Face may yet turn out to be a natural mound
which just happens to resemble a frontal view of a humanoid face
and head (albeit eroded), but it is defintely not just a 'trick
of light and shadow'...


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project, providing
the latest news and reports relating to the leading-edge issues
of our time in science and technology and their possible present
and future implications as we enter the 21st Century and a new
Era, as well as other periodic information and updates on
TEP-related news, projects and events


THE ERAS PROJECT

Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/erasproject


� The Eras Project, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                   'You Can't Tell the People' - A Review

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 04:33:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 13:39:15 -0400
Subject: 'You Can't Tell the People' - A Review


Hi All,

You can now find a review of Georgina Bruni's book 'You Can't
Tell The People' on my site:

http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/youcanttell.html


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 13:45:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee



 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100


 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 00:23:38 -0400


 >>2. The decision isn't between ET and a meteor. Brad Sparks and
 >>Bruce Maccabbee have written eloquently about this on UpDates.
 >>The pilots saw something. What? Do we think it's a meteor? Then
 >>we need to establish that hypothesis. We do that -- as Dave
 >>himself demonstrates in his investigations -- by looking at the
 >>idea on its own merits.


 >Hi Greg,

 >The only misuse of Occam here is your own - the poor guy
 >must be turning in his grave.

 >Against your Brad Sparks and Bruce Maccabbe I'll place my RV
 >Jones of British Scientific Intelligence who helped us win a war
 >correctly using the principles of Occam's Razor to predict
 >advances in German V-weapons.

 >Of which he writes, with reference to essentia non sunt
 >multiplicanda praeter necessitatem "...if you start allowing
 >more complicated hypotheses than are essential to explain
 >the facts, you can launch yourself into a realm of fantasy
 >where your consequent actions will become misdirected..."
 >(Most Secret War, pp 371-2)

 >Jones is even more specific in his application of the Razor to
 >ufological buffery viz:

 >"Of all the possible explanations for a set of explanations, the
 >one with the minimum of supposition should be accepted, until it
 >is proved wrong. Otherwise one lives in a fearsomely imaginative
 >world in which rational conduct becomes impossible...

Note very carefully the statement that one should accept the
explanation "with the minimum of supposition..... until it
isproven wrong." You see, R. V. Jones would agree with me: keep
an explanation until it is proven wrong.

The problem with analyses of UFO sightings by debunkers,
scoffers and severe skeptics is NOT that they propose Candidate
Explanatory Hypotheses (CEP) , but rather that they propose CEP
and then proclaim, often loudly if not publicly, that their CEP
is the correct explanation without proving it to be correct...
or at least without proving that it does not conflict with the
sighting data.

Example: in Menzel's last book he proposed water drops on
Arnold's windshield as a likely explanation for the sighting.
(This was, of course, after proposing nearly half a dozen
explanations in previous books.) Did Menzel take the time to
test this CEP against the available data? Apparently not. The
naive reader of Menzel's book, aware that Menzel a scientist of
great capability and (presumed) integrity, would likely accept
that as a "logical" explanation without knowing (because Menzel
didn't mention it) that Arnold rolled down his window to look at
the objects without reflections.

Probably R.V. Jones writing about the same case would not have
proposed water drops on the windshield.

In Menzel's first book he described the CB Moore sighting of
April 24, 1949. Menzel proposed a mirage of the balloon that
Moore and the others were tracking as the explanation for the
odd, rapidly moving object seen through the theodolite. To
support his mirage theory of an atmospheric "bubble" acting as a
lens, Menzel went to the trouble to write an appendix for his
book in which he developed his theory especially to explain this
UFO sighting. Again, the naive reader, probably a scientist,
knowing of Menzel's reputation and noting the derivation of
physical phenomena in the appendix, would probably assume that
Menzel had nailed this case which Menzel himself designated as
the best of the early sightings. (1947-1952 or so). The reader
would quite likely know that the maximum angle for a mirage is
about 1/2 degree, and, from the diagram provided by Menzel,
conclude that the angle between the balloon and the "UFO" would
have been small, certainly less than a degree, by Menzel's own
calculation.

The reader would not know, since Menzel didn't mention it, that
the angle between the balloon and the UFO increased from several
degrees to well over a hundred degrees, thus completely
obviating the mirage bubble theory.

That case too old for you? How about the Japan Airlines case in
which the CSICOP group, based on the Klassic analysis, claimed
that the air crew over Alaska saw two planets. The naive reader
of the CSICOP press release would not know, because Klass didn't
mention it, that initially the two UFOs were one above the other
and then suddenly they reoriented to become side by side..
Rather tough for Jupiter and Mars, the two "extraterrestrial
objets" involved, acording to Klass.

This raises the following question: is it up to the skeptics to
prove explanations wrong? Answer: yes.

On this very mail list over the last few weeks we have seen a
discussion of the lack of criticism by skeptics of explanations
proposed by other skeptics. Example: so far as I know neither
Oberg nor Sheaffer, the prime skeptics-in-waiting, had a comment
on Klass' Jupiter and Mars theory. True, Klass changed his mind
and proposed a subsequent theory: moonlight reflected from
clouds. But he did so without describing why the Mars and
Jupiter theory was wrong.

It was when I discovered how erroneous the explanations could be
that I became (horrors! go to hades immediately!) skeptical of
the skeptics.

And thus I am skeptical of RV Jones.... I don't know how many
cases he has explained,,,,, if any, but I suppose that he was,
like many skeptics, speaking "ex cathedra" without any real
experience in UFO investigation and explanation. Hence he could
easily pass off the whole subject as being created by a bunch of
kooks and nuts (as claimed to me by the Editor of Applied
Optics.... and who subsequently published my article on the New
Zealand case) without so much as checking on whether or not the
explanations made any sense.

But there is a more direct application of Ockham's razor here:
when a skeptic (even a UFO "believer" can be a skeptic) proposes
a CEP he should note how many supplementary hypotheses are
necessary in order to make that CEP work. Does one have to
assume the witness was partially blind or that the witness
temporarily went crazy, or that something else that contradicts
the witness' testimony must have been true to make the
explanation work? If there was any justification for Menzel's
suggestion that Arnold saw water drops on his windsheild, even
though Arnold talked about seeing the objects through an open
window, that justification had to be that Arnold was wrong.
Assume Arnold opened his window at some other time and then
forgot that it actually had been closed during the sighting.
This must be considered an "Ockham type" assumption to make the
explanation work.

On the other hand, one can assume that Arnold was reporting
accurately. In that case the explanation doesn't work. So, which
is better, which is more "Okham like".... that Arnold didn't
acurately remember when he rolled down the window or that he
accurately remembered. Some on this list would justify a choice
by looking at the outcome: it is easier to assume that Arnold
incorrectly remembered when he rolled down his window than it is
to assume that he saw truly unexplained objects.

Where have we heard/read this type of reasoning before? Our own
James Easton has proclaimed it is more likely that Arnold saw
pelicans than that he saw UFOs from outer space. HAHAHAHAH How
do we know anything about the liklihood of UFOs from outer
space? Answer: we don't know what that liklihood is.

However, we can analyze the pelican explanation and decide
whether or not to keep the aluminized high speed pelicans or to
reject them and accept that the explanation must be something
else, even if we don't know what.

(Incidently: regarding brightly reflecting pelicans, here is a
comparison: imagine a piece of white paper 3 feet square that as
been oiled to give it a slight shininess and imagine that paper
to be a mile away in the direction OPPOSITE to the sun. Now
decide for yourself whether or not it could appear as bright as
a sun glint from a mirror or as a welder's arc.

If you've never seen either, I suggest you find a small mirror
and have someone at a distance from you turn it until you get a
reflection from the sun. A 1 inch mirror at a hundred feet, for
example. Compare this with a piece of white paper the same size
and distance. we want a full report and the results will be on
the next test.)

Jones continues:

 >Keeping all
 >>these facts in mind the balance of evidence regarding flying
 >>saucers - viewed against the critical situations in which I used
 >>to have to decide on courses of action based on evidence from
 >>eye-witnesses and other sources - is heavily against them being
 >>intelligently controlled vehicles. But I also know that, even if
 >>the current American and Russian investigations come to this
 >>same conclusion or even a stronger one it will not discourage
 >>the flying saucer believers. For these investigators are faced
 >>with the impossible job, if flying saucers do not exist, of
 >>proving a completely negative case. This is one of the most
 >>difficult of all Intelligence tasks, and even if the
 >>investigation is as thorough as humanly possible, the flying
 >>saucer exponents will always be able to conjure new hypothesis
 >>that had not been considered." (Natural Philosophy of Flying
 >>Saucers, 1968)


The problem with the above statement by R V Jones is that he has
made the "standard" error of science as applied to UFO sightings
(and other unrecognized or uncategorized phenomena). He assumes
that the whole UFO phenomenon of sightings, etc. can be based on
one of several theories for the existence of UFOs.

He probably wouldn't call them theories, but that's what they
are. UFO "believers" have theories about ETs or spirits or
whatever, that fly around in UFO craft and so they can "predict"
what these UFOs or ufonauts would do, That is the "normal
science" method: having a theory about some phenomenon allows
the scientist to predict certain results of certain experiments.
If the results do occur then they can be considered "proof" of
the accuracy of the theory.

However, the proper attack on the UFO problem is not to try to
prove a particular theory explains UFO sighting because there is
no really independently provable unconventional theory for UFO
sightings. The proper attack is to try to disprove the proposed
explanations, the CEP.

If each CEP can be rejected, then one has evidence of something
previously unknown (not covered by an existing theory).

Anyone who proposes an explanation should be prepared to defend
it. The way to do that is to follow the dictum of Nobel Prize
winner Richard Feynman: try to prove yourself wrong. If you
think a possible explanation for the Arnold case is that he saw
meteors, then proceed as follows: CEP = meteors.

How could I prove that meteors is NOT the correct explanation?
Well, meteors are high speed objects generally seen at high
altitudes. How do these characteristics compare with what was
reported? I could compare the apparent speeds of the objects.
Arnold claimed the objects were traveling at about 1700 mph
(Rainier to Adams in 102 sec),. Meteors travel ten or more times
faster. Also, meteors traveling along a level trajectory at 9000
ft or lower is "unheard of." Also, once a meteor stops glowing
it has slowed to the point where it won't start glowing again.
And so on.

Lots of arguments can be presented against meteors.

To make Arnold's sighting fit the meteor explanation would
require ad-hoc hypotheses about Arnold's failure to time them
correctly, his failure to give a correct estimated distance,.
etc. For example, a dyed in the wool skeptic who chose the
meteor explanation might say that Arnold was wrong in claiming
the the objets were lower than Mt Rainier and the implication
that they passed between him and Rainier. The actual situation,
this skeptic would say , is that the objects were at a higher
elevation than Rainier and that therefore they could have been a
hundred miles away at a high elevation and hence meteors. QED.

Which is "more likely": that they were meteors and Arnold made
an incorrect statement, or that they were UFOs from outer space?
Where does Occam's double-edged sword cut this time?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

             Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 02:40:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 13:49:11 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch


 >From: UFO UpDates Toronto

 >[Response dictated to ebk via phone - Chris Rutkowski's' system
 > is currently down --ebk]

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 12:54:44 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Young

 >>>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 01:51:21 -0700
 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >><snip>

 >>>More oddly, public interest in UFOs is at or near all-time
 >>>highs! This last statement is my personal take only, I have no
 >>>numbers to back it up.

 >>>Thus my question, and fodder for a nice little study!

 >>>Can anyone suggest a cheap-and-dirty measure or gauge of "Public
 >>>Interest in UFOs" (PIU)? (public awareness?)

 >>Public opinion surveys are not perfect, but it was my impression
 >>that the Gallup Polls periodically asked about the same
 >>questions (an important consideration) related to UFOs, and that
 >>this began in the late 40s. If this has continued, it might
 >>provide some sort of baseline on public attitudes.

 >>I know that the National Academy of Sciences has been doing
 >>annual public opinion polling on public attitudes on science for
 >>about ten years, and that UFOs have been in the questions.

 >>According to an editorial last year by Bob Girard in his catalog
 >>the UFO book publishing business went flop. I don't know
 >>whether this has continued, but commercial book publishers are
 >>pretty wired in to sales figures and public interest.

 >>Before I get mugged here for the above comment, we are obviously
 >>talking here about "public attitudes", not whether the subject
 >>"deserves study".

 >>My own impression is that there are not many inquiries nowadays
 >>from school kids re UFOs at the planetarium. I think that the
 >>peak curve topped out in 1997 with the Roswell stuff. That, of
 >>course, is only my impression.

 >>Does the National UFO Reporting Center or MUFON publish numbers
 >>of sightings? That might be something.

 >Dear Bob,

 >The Canadian UFO Survey produces numbers of exactly this
 >relevance! Isn't anyone listening?

 >The URL for the Annual Surveys since 1989 is:

 >www.geocities.com/aristotl.geo/

 >and in addition the most dedicated Canadian researchers, who are
 >part of our network, co-operated in a 'Gallup-style' poll a few
 >years ago asking these questions and the results were reported
 >on UFO UpDates and elsewhere.

 >The gist is that we have found that UFO Sightings are
 >increasing slightly in number over the past ten years and that
 >this empirical data is what should be considered when discussing
 >relative UFO sightings.

 >Chris Rutkowski
 >[via ebk]


Hello Chris:

I visited your website again:

http://www.geocities.com/aristotl.geo/

.. and indeed there is a lot of valuable information, statistics
etc.  going back to 1990 at least.

However, there might be a small misunderstanding.

I was asking for some index of UFO Interest/Awareness/Belief or
what-have-you, quite apart from numbers of actual sightings!

It was my hope to compare and contrast public interest in UFOs
with the sightings statistics; which I already have. I was also
hoping (alas) to get some consistent numbers indicating public
interest, going back to 1940 or so.

So far, the best suggestions have been public opinion polls
(Roper, Gallup) about _belief_ in UFOs; not a bad start in
itself, but even these leave large gaps!  Furthermore, these are
mostly restricted to the USA, aside from some French polls
mentioned by Gildas.

I'm well aware of your good work on Canadian sightings
statistics otherwise.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 17:41:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 00:23:38 -0400

 >>>The best way is the application of Occam's Razor - do not
 >>>multiply hypotheses unnecessarily, always chose the simplest
 >>>explanation as this is _probably_ correct. Applied to the
 >>>Chiles-Whitted case, we chose a fireball meteor because that is
 >>>the best fit given current knowledge and bearing in mind the
 >>>foibles of human perception. To chose ET when a simpler
 >>>explanation is available is neither logical nor scientific.

 >>Exactly my point. This is a misuse of Occam:

 >>1. We're in no position to assess how likely an alien visit
 >>would be. Maybe the universe is full of aliens, zipping from
 >>planet to planet, especially in our stellar neighborhood. Or
 >>maybe that's not true at all. We simply don't know. So it's just
 >>a prejudice on our part to assume that alien visits are
 >>unlikely. It would also be a prejudice to assume that they _are_
 >>likely.

 >>2. The decision isn't between ET and a meteor. Brad Sparks and
 >>Bruce Maccabbee have written eloquently about this on UpDates.
 >>The pilots saw something. What? Do we think it's a meteor? Then
 >>we need to establish that hypothesis. We do that -- as Dave
 >>himself demonstrates in his investigations -- by looking at the
 >>idea on its own merits.

 >Hi Greg,

 >The only misuse of Occam here is your own - the poor guy
 >must be turning in his grave.

 >Against your Brad Sparks and Bruce Maccabbe I'll place my RV
 >Jones of British Scientific Intelligence who helped us win a war
 >correctly using the principles of Occam's Razor to predict
 >advances in German V-weapons.

 >Of which he writes, with reference to essentia non sunt
 >multiplicanda praeter necessitatem "...if you start allowing
 >more complicated hypotheses than are essential to explain
 >the facts, you can launch yourself into a realm of fantasy
 >where your consequent actions will become misdirected..."
 >(Most Secret War, pp 371-2)

 >Jones is even more specific in his application of the Razor to
 >ufological buffery viz:

 >"Of all the possible explanations for a set of explanations, the
 >one with the minimum of supposition should be accepted, until it
 >is proved wrong. Otherwise one lives in a fearsomely imaginative
 >world in which rational conduct becomes impossible...Keeping all
 >these facts in mind the balance of evidence regarding flying
 >saucers - viewed against the critical situations in which I used
 >to have to decide on courses of action based on evidence from
 >eye-witnesses and other sources - is heavily against them being
 >intelligently controlled vehicles. But I also know that, even if
 >the current American and Russian investigations come to this
 >same conclusion or even a stronger one it will not discourage
 >the flying saucer believers. For these investigators are faced
 >with the impossible job, if flying saucers do not exist, of
 >proving a completely negative case. This is one of the most
 >difficult of all Intelligence tasks, and even if the
 >investigation is as thorough as humanly possible, the flying
 >saucer exponents will always be able to conjure new hypothesis
 >that had not been considered." (Natural Philosophy of Flying
 >Saucers, 1968)

 >That, Greg, just about sums up my thoughts on your continually
 >multiplying hypotheses...don't cut yourself on that razor!

 >And before I go, many thanks for your perceptive comments
 >concerning "The UFOs that Never Were." At least we now know that
 >at least one copy of the book has reached the United States.

 >As for only the British being subject to the influence of the
 >tabloid Press version of UFOlogy - who are you kidding?  How
 >about the National Enquirer - weren't they offering a prize for
 >the best UFO yarn shortly before Travis Walton was 'abducted' ?

 >Of course, that sort of media hype couldn't happen back home,
 >only to the Brits!

 >With regards to your point about our denigratory swipes against
 >"UFO buffs" - your point is?  I would point out that the book
 >was not written for 'UFOlogists,' we don't try to preach to
 >those who are already 'converted' - I was writing for the mass
 >of ordinary folk who don't necessarily 'buy' the idea of ET UFOs
 >on faith alone, and who may have a taste for critical thinking
 >noticeably absent from the monotous and servings receive from
 >the Ufological choir.



Hi Dave,

I've noticed whenever a debunker has a weak argument they
immediatly trot out statements like the following - the idea of
ET UFOs on faith alone, and who may have a taste for critical
thinking noticeably absent from the monotous and servings
receive from the Ufological choir - or the next smear about the
so-called believers or the ETHers. Don't you people ever get
tiered ofg that nonesense. Is there special course and then an
exam you have to take to qualify.

Occams razor. The principle that the simplest explanation is
likely the right one. Here's one for you. RV Jones of British
Scientific Intelligence had a vested interest in making his
statements [and being insulting to boot-an obvious
disinformation ploy] about the UFO phenonmenon-it being that
they had too much intelligence on the phenomenon to be straight
with the electorate. As an employee of the intelligence
community, he is obviously suspect, and was selling you a bill
of goods.

I've seen several examples lately of the simplest explanations
for UFO sightings. Meteors that descend then climb from low
altitudes-an unproven theory. Ball lightening-another unproven
phenomenon.

Earth lights due to seismic activity.

Mass hysteria and mass hallucination.

Swamp gas. [This one we know exists but how come we never see
reports by people claiming they've seen swamp gas?]

Yet these theories [and as yet they are only theories] are
regularly dragged out as simple but real explanations for UFO
sightings usually by those on shakey ground and lacking any real
knowledge of the phenomenon or with some ax to grind.

You know Dave I really don't get the position of the debunker.
What's in it for you? I get a case in here. I go check it out.
In most cases there is a prosaic explanation for the sighting.
Usually the report is old to begin with and almost impossible to
check out unless there has been some report made to the
authorities. Most are anecdotle to begin with. But then so are
ball lightening, Earthlights and climbing meteors.

What's your motivation? To save the world from ufology? why not
something more immediate, like saving the world from organized
religions. Think of all of the lives you would save.Perhaps you
believe that I/we think this is a religion, after all the words
belief and believe ar tossed around often enough by debunkers.
Perish the thought. If I thought this was going to be the case
and the future of this phenomenon, I'd hit the ground running in
the opposite direction. Religious fervor scares the crap out of
me.

If someone wants to come in and definitively prove that an event
didn't happen - so be it. But they have to abide by the same
rules as the investigator who claims the report has merit-not by
offering half an explanation or personal theory or failing that
throwing insults around about the investigator-trying to
undermine his or her credibility by using the buzz words so
often used by debunkers as if they are on some higher plane of
intelligence. There are words that UFO investigators could use
like anal retentive when it comes to debunking but you don't see
that applied here.

You know Dave, I don't think you are any more intelligent than I
am. I'm curious about this phenomenon - I had a good daytime
sighting by the way - and I'm likely more experienced at
identifying things in the sky than most since I've spent
considerably more time in it than most. So I object to being
lumped in with the few off the wall nuts that get into this
thing for whatever reason and screw it up for the rest who are
genuinely curious about what's going on. We shouldn't be
punished for their lack of reasoned descretion.

If you want to achieve what you feel is some sense of
superiority with your interpretation so be it - but you had
better start dealing with us one-on-one rather than with blanket
condemnation, because I for one am not standing for being
insulted without explanation as to what you and yours agendas
really are.

I've yet to see one debunker back away from an obviously flawed
explanation to a sighting, while I've seen many older UFO cases
dusted off and declared not worth considering further by UFO
investigators. Debunkers on the other hand seem to want to hold
their lines at all costs - including their credibility.


Regards,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 1

             Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 1 May 2001 08:16:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 17:46:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Hamilton


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :>
 >>Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:59 PM
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>Mary Castner, over on P-47, posted the URL for the following
 >>article - she suggested that she: "...thought this article
 >>interesting. Also it was suggested a possible genetic connection
 >>which might explain why abductions run in some families. It
 >>maybe old hat to some of you."

<snip>

 >>... Those most open to mystical experience tend also to be
 >>open to new experiences generally. They are usually creative
 >>and innovative, with a breadth of interests and a tolerance
 >>for ambiguity (as determined by questionnaire). They also
 >>tend toward fantasy, notes David Wulff, "suggesting a capacity
 >>to suspend the judging process that distinguishes imaginings and
 >>real events."

 >This article was enlightening, to say the least. However, many
 >of the specifics, as well as some of the generalities put forth
 >in this article do not fit me. I wonder how many other abductees
 >found this somewhat offensive. Once again, we are prone to
 >'lumping' or 'splintering' in an effort to grasp some measure of
 >this phenomena. And, since we have been discussing the ET
 >experience as 'belief vs. reality', I think I need to chime in
 >here, as this article relates to that particular issue and to
 >me, personally.

<snip>

 >I think we are missing some basic information here. What do you
 >all think? Am I just 'splintering' information, or are the
 >experts 'lumping' everything into one big pot, looking for
 >simple answers (again).

 >Frankly, this is _all_ too weird for me to accept.

 >Sue

 >Ex-abductee


Sue,

I am not sure how you became an ex-abductee unless you are
saying that those type of experiences have ceased for you.

I find articles and papers on the subject above so rooted in a
rusting western paradigm that I do not take them seriously.
There are neuro-scientists who have been conditioned to believe
that consciousness is an epiphenomena of the human brain, but
what if they are wrong? What if the human brain is only a
mechanism fashioned by consciousness?

New books are expressing a new view of the mind based on the
'Quantum Mind' which tends to show an underlying freedom of
consciousness unconfined by material constraints. If this is so,
we may be at the leading edge of a paradigm shift, one showing
that mind and consciousness may be non-material and non-local in
nature. That would put some of the more primitive brain theories
in doubt.


Best,

Bill Hamilton








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

              Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 10:18:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 18:04:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Felder


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600

<snip>

 >How do you do this when you're clinically dead? How does one
 >sense everything around them, see perfectly, hear perfectly,
 >feel emotions and feelings and yet no pain and be able to
 >describe everything that happened after awakening... the events,
 >the conversations people had with one another (while you were
 >dead and listening). I'm interested in hearing what others have
 >to say about this.

Hi Sue. Thank you for sharing a very personal perspective on
this issue. I know it isn't easy to talk about an experience
such as you describe. For me, the moment came in the wee hours
of the morning on September 15, 1999. I remember telling my
mother, who was on her knees praying beside my hospital bed, to
call the doctor, that they had to take my baby then, that I
wasn't going to survive until the scheduled c-section time of 8
AM. That was in 1999. I still cannot bring myself to openly
discuss the "little gray square" that was with me that entire
hell-filled night.

This is my take on the abduction question. Such an event, if it
is a true phsycial event, would leave its mark on a person.
Something as traumatic as that would change a person in some
way. My family and friends can tell you that I am not the same
person that I used to be. I was changed on the night of
September 15, 1999. The trauma of that night left its mark, and
I will never again be the person I was before. If a person has
truly experienced the horrific trauma of an abduction by alien
beings...a physical reality...whether they actually have
conscious recall of the event or not...it would leave its mark.
It would change them.

If I feel the need to verify someone's story of abduction, I
talk to their family and friends. If these people tell me that
the person claiming abduction has changed, that he or she isn't
the same person they were before the alleged abduction, then
they have my attention. That's what convinces me that
_something_ happened to this person.


My two cents

Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 1

                  Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:19:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 18:07:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :>
 >>Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:59 PM
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>One experience common to many spiritual states is hearing the
 >>voice of God. It seems to arise when you misattribute inner
 >>speech (the "little voice" in your head that you know you
 >>generate yourself) to something outside yourself.

 >That 'little voice' was distinctly male. He asked me, "Sue, do
 >you really want to die?" It was not my 'inner voice', because I
 >thought I wanted to die... before I was given the choice.

 >How do you do this when you're clinically dead? How does one
 >sense everything around them, see perfectly, hear perfectly,
 >feel emotions and feelings and yet no pain and be able to
 >describe everything that happened after awakening... the events,
 >the conversations people had with one another (while you were
 >dead and listening). I'm interested in hearing what others have
 >to say about this.

 >I think we are missing some basic information here. What do you
 >all think? Am I just 'splintering' information, or are the
 >experts 'lumping' everything into one big pot, looking for
 >simple answers (again).

 >Frankly, this is 'all' too weird for me to accept.

 >Sue
 >Ex-abductee

Hello Sue,

You're in the midst of New Age topics here. Although UFOs are a
part of New Age subjects, spirituality, as exemplified by
near-death experiences (NDEs) and/or OBEs, are even more so.

I'm presuming you confirmed that the conversations you heard
while clinically dead actually did take place as you recalled,
along with other things you sensed as having happened but should
not "normally" have known about.

You can get more information about it all by looking at the
commonalities from a considerable number of NDE and/or OBE
cases. (I've added a list of references on these at the end of
this post.) Of course, this is the same thing we do with UFO
sightings and experiences.

My apologies to any on this list who want to have nothing to do
with New Age topics, UFOs excepted. However, we really can't
discuss abductee experiences seriously unless we acknowledge
possible reality of paranormal phenomena that accompany them,
and these include New Age topics. Some fraction of UFO
abductions are seen to be OBEs, in which the abductee's
consciousness/awareness is abducted but his/her body remains
back in bed or wherever. So OBEs are very worthy of study for
those involved with the whole UFO phenomenon. Most OBEs occur
spontaneously, or as desired by experienced practitioners,
rather than as only induced by aliens.

The aliens' ability to contact or manipulate one's psychic
awareness (or inner voice), as in OBE abductions, extends to
their use of some form of mental telepathy for communicating
with their abductees and presumably between themselves.
Presumably it is one's psychic awareness, often called the
spirit or soul, that is communicated with in this. For more
general information on this, I would recommend reading about
verified past-life recalls.

Now I find I must apologize also to those associated with an
organized religion that does not accept the concept of
reincarnation, for raising this subject. However, Christianity
at least accepts the concept of the human spirit, and these
studies tell a lot more about it. The research findings of Ian
Stevenson are particularly illuminating on this. Past-life
recalls are obviously related to NDEs and OBEs, since some of
the latter involve memories of the between-life state and these
mesh well with descriptions of NDE memories.

Here is the short bibliography. For more, see my website file
below.

                           On NDEs

Dr. Maurice Rawlings, 'Beyond Death's Door' (Bantam Books, 1979)

Dr. Raymond Moody, 'Life After Life' (Bantam Books, 1975)

Dr. Michael B. Sabom, 'Recollection of Death - A Medical
Investigation' (Harper and Row, 1982)

Dr. Melvin Morse, 'Closer to the Light' (New York: Ivy Books,
1990)

Dr. Kimberly Clark Sharp, 'After the Light' (New York: William
Morrow & Co., 1995)

                      On OBEs

Robert A. Monroe, 'Journeys Out of the Body' (Garden City, NY:
Anchor Press, 1977)

'Far Journeys' (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1985)


Dr. Janet Lee Mitchell, 'Out-of-Body Experiences: A Handbook'
(Ballantine Books, 1981)

Dr. Albert Taylor, 'Soul Traveler: A Guide to Out-of-Body
Experiences and the Wonders Beyond' (North American Trade
Library, 2000)

Edward T. Martin, 'King of Travelers: Jesus' Lost Years in
India' (Jonah Publishing Co., P.O. Box 549, Lampasas, TX 76550;
1999), pp. 200-211



Jim Deardorff
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/rebirth.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

             Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:14:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:00:04 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Clarke


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 02:40:17 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >I was asking for some index of UFO Interest/Awareness/Belief or
 >what-have-you, quite apart from numbers of actual sightings!

 >It was my hope to compare and contrast public interest in UFOs
 >with the sightings statistics; which I already have. I was also
 >hoping (alas) to get some consistent numbers indicating public
 >interest, going back to 1940 or so.

 >So far, the best suggestions have been public opinion polls
 >(Roper, Gallup) about _belief_ in UFOs; not a bad start in
 >itself, but even these leave large gaps!  Furthermore, these are
 >mostly restricted to the USA, aside from some French polls
 >mentioned by Gildas.


Hi Larry,

You ought to check out Robert Durant's piece on "Public Opinion
Polls on UFOs" from Evans and Stacy's UFO 1947-97 (John Brown
Publishing, London, 1997).

This is an excellent summary of polls from 1947, 1950, 1966, the
70s etc up to the 90s by a variety of polling organisations.
Mostly USA but interesting.


Cheers

Dave Clarke









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:07:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke



 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100

 >And thus I am skeptical of RV Jones.... I don't know how many
 >cases he has explained,,,,, if any, but I suppose that he was,
 >like many skeptics, speaking "ex cathedra" without any real
 >experience in UFO investigation and explanation. Hence he could
 >easily pass off the whole subject as being created by a bunch of
 >kooks and nuts (as claimed to me by the Editor of Applied
 >Optics.... and who subsequently published my article on the New
 >Zealand case) without so much as checking on whether or not the
 >explanations made any sense.


Hi Bruce,

Methinks your knowledge of ufological history requires a
revision. RV Jones was one of the very first scientific
intelligence officers to investigate reports of UFOs - first
reports of what later became 'foo fighters' from the European
theater, secondly he played a very influential role in a secret
British investigation of the Scandinavian 'ghost rocket' wave of
1946.

Again he applied Occam's Razor to the ghost rockets and his
method of investigation was carried over into the Cold War era
when, a Director of Scientific Intelligence for the British Air
Ministry, he was called upon to investigate flying saucers.

Jones had high level intelligence contacts with the CIA and was
involved in an early British Intelligence study of UFOs that I
am piecing together as we speak.

Indeed, his influence and knowledge was such that in October
1967, when Britain was in the middle of an enormous UFO wave,
the MOD seriously considered bringing him out of retirement to
act as a special consultant in the place of a full time UFO
investigation officer.

So I think he knew rather more than you give him credit for.

As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
pathetic.

Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
so, years after his death.

Food for thought!

Best,

Dave Clarke











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

              Low Flying Triangular Objects: An Addendum Report

From: Colm Kelleher - NIDS <nids@earthlink.net>
Date: 1 May 2001 18:39:55 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:09:23 -0400
Subject: Low Flying Triangular Objects: An Addendum Report


National Institute for Discovery Science - http://www.nidsci.org


The National Institute For Discovery Science has received
approximately ninety-four reported sightings of triangular UFOs
seen between 1990 and the present. In a study to determine the
possibility of patterns to these sightings, each sighting was
plotted onto a map of the United States. Two maps were created.
Map 1 plots the location of each triangular UFO sighting between
1990 and the present. Additionally, 17 U.S. Air Force bases
under the Air Mobility Command (AMC) or an affiliate were
plotted on the map. This map shows the proximity of sightings to
the AMC bases. It appears that the sightings are predominately
within corridors between bases. By connecting the bases with a
straight line, it shows that the sightings seem to closely
follow, with only minor divergence, these lines.

Map 2 also plots the location of the same triangular UFO
sightings for the same period of time. In addition to the 17 AMC
and affiliate bases, 16 bases belonging to the Air Force
Materiel Command (AFMC) are also plotted. Combining the bases of
the two commands and then plotting their relationship to the
sightings show distinct patterns of sightings along the straight
lines between bases. Again it appears that the sightings are
predominately within corridors between the plotted bases. In the
Eastern United States, Wright-Patterson AFB, HQ AFMC, seems to
be a focal point, with Scott AFB, HQ AMC, running a close
second. It is interesting that the January 5, 2000 sightings by
five police officers in Illinois were in such extremely close
proximity to Scott AFB.

Study of both maps reveal a large empty corridor in the
mid-western United States where there is an absence of
sightings. Incidentally, in the same area there is an absence of
AMC or AFMC bases. The totality of the evidence leads us to
hypothesize that the flight paths are suggestive of the
deployment of military aircraft hitherto unacknowledged.

We invite comments on this hypothesis.

See the "What's New" section of the NIDS website to view the
report.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

               Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 14:32:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:12:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Velez


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :>
 >>Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:59 PM
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>Mary Castner, over on P-47, posted the URL for the following
 >>article - she suggested that she: "...thought this article
 >>interesting. Also it was suggested a possible genetic connection
 >>which might explain why abductions run in some families. It
 >>maybe old hat to some of you."

 >>Source: MSNBC

 >>http://www.msnbc.com/news/566079.asp?cp1=1

 >>Mystic Visions Or Brain Circuits At Work?

 >>Religion And The Brain

 >>In the new field of 'neurotheology', scientists seek the
 >>biological basis of spirituality. Is God all in our heads?

 >>By Sharon Begley

 >>NEWSWEEK

 ><snip>

 >>... Those most open to mystical experience tend also to be
 >>open to new experiences generally. They are usually creative
 >>and innovative, with a breadth of interests and a tolerance
 >>for ambiguity (as determined by questionnaire). They also
 >>tend toward fantasy, notes David Wulff, "suggesting a capacity
 >>to suspend the judging process that distinguishes imaginings and
 >>real events."

 >Dear Listers & EBK,

 >This article was enlightening, to say the least. However, many
 >of the specifics, as well as some of the generalities put forth
 >in this article do not fit me. I wonder how many other abductees
 >found this somewhat offensive.

Hi Sue, hi All,

I had the same reaction that you did Sue. I found it
'offensive.' But I'd like to explain 'why' I found it offensive
to those who may not understand.

I do not find the theory (as applied to religious experiences)
to be offensive or off base in some of its conclusions and
assumptions. What I found 'offensive' is that it appears on a
"UFO" List under the heading, "Re: Abductions, The Brain And
Genetics?" "As if" the piece was about, or explained, UFO
abduction. Not so. The only thing in it that 'may' relate in
some distant fashion to UFO abduction is the mention of Michael
Persinger and his theory of electrically induced brain activity.
(Frontal lobe electrically induced hallucinations.) I'm not
going to rehash how absurd Mr. Persinger's theories regarding
UFO abduction are. We've been over that a hundred times. The
frustration comes from the fact that people will discuss and
debate the possibility that our experiences are
psychological/biological in origin till the cows come home, but
try and get some discussion going on how to check out or verify
the testimony as reports of "real" events and everybody heads
for the hills.

Sue, _very few_ people take us seriously. Even fewer take us
literally. As with those who repeatedly throw "IFO" cases (where
the cause of the sighting is known and easily explained) into
the faces of those who present 'harder to explain' or
'unexplainable' cases,...so it is with UFO abduction. It is
easier for some to entertain the notion that what we are
reporting is a purely psychological phenom, than it is to
entertain it as something "real." I've said it many times
before, I think that that kind of pig headed insistence that it
"must be" purely psychological is based on a subconscious fear
that 'some of us' may be reporting true details surrounding
actual events. (As opposed to 'mental' ones.)

Occams Razor is fine -up to a point. Sure, it is worthwhile
studying the possible psychological ramifications of abduction
reports. But why must it always be as the 'causative' factor of
the reports and not as an investigation into the psychological
damage that may have been caused 'by' the events on the
individuals reporting? Why is it always at the expense of
investigating the reports as actual events?

No one cares if there has been any psychological damage done 'to
us' by the encounters. It is much more important to come up with
a way to -dismiss- our testimony as being "caused by"
psychological or 'brain related' malfunctions. That way they
won't have to deal with the fear and trepidation that we have to
live with daily. They won't have to deal with their own guilt
over any pain or damage that they themselves may have inflicted
on us by ridiculing and ignoring us rather than listening to us
and helping us.

Instead of comfort and help abductees are met with incredulity
and *insensitivity. (*In the form of ridicule or the summary and
many times 'instant' dismissal of their reports as untrue, or as
'not possible' for them to be based on 'reality.')

Abductee reality:

1. You're 'on your own.' (unless you are lucky enough to have
peers that you can relate to and get feedback from freely and
without fear of rejection or ridicule.)

2. Nobody has to care if you're hurting because they can dismiss
your reports and your anguish as having originated inside your
own head. They leave you to your own devices, and without words,
tell you to go and help yourself if 'help' is what you need.
After all, we're all just 'crazy' right?

3. Our UFO/alien/abduction reports (scare the hell) out of any
sane, thinking person that hears them. Speaking of the human
Brain/mind: the 'mind' will automatically erect defense barriers
against anything that threatens its stability/stasis/balance.
The "news" we bring disturbs the equilibrium. Disrupts the
internal 'balance' of one who is exposed to it. It 'threatens'
people in the full blown negative meaning of the word. Right
down to ones core. (You know, you've have to deal with it
yourself.)

Just as the realization has effected you both psychologically
and emotionally, it has the same effect on those who are exposed
even at the safe distance of one who enjoys 'secondary exposure'
status. This obsession with explaining away our reports as being
purely psychological/biological in nature is just a form of self
preservation and defense. It wouldn't be so objectionable to us
as abductees if there was also an ongoing investigation (running
in tandem with these psychological studies) to investigate our
reports as actual events. But that isn't the case - is it.

Like Rodney Dangerfeild, "we don't get no respect!" Over and
over we are served up explanation after explanation that quite
simply does not address all of what we are experiencing. All of
the theories that are thrown up at us are not only inadequate in
terms of explaining the phenomenon, they are all mutually
exclusive! One says, "false memories," another says, "sleep
paralysis" yet another says, "electrically induced
hallucinations" on and on and on like that. Every base is
covered with the glaring exception of; taking us literally and
at our word.

An "investigation" of our reports -as reported- seems to be
"Mission Impossible." What we are reporting send people's minds
into instant 'vapor lock.' They just get stuck and they don't
know what to make of us or what we are telling them. I honestly
don't think there is much we can do about that. The reaction we
get seems to be self defensive in nature. I would never rip the
"bandage" off of another persons wound. So, _we_ have to learn
to be patient, and tolerant of our brothers and sisters while
they struggle to understand what we are telling them.

We go to 'people' for help, and it turns out that it is 'they'
who need "help" in understanding and adjusting to our "news."
"We" have to put our own needs on the back burner so that we can
help them come to grips with the reality of this disturbing
situation that we -all- find ourselves in.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." (Spock)

So put your own needs on hold Sue. We have a world full of
people who live with their 'eyes wide shut' and who fight what
they are being told with the same helpless desperation that we
have had to fight it with. We have had to overcome our deepest
fears in order to survive psychologically. They (people) must be
given the opportunity to do the same, and in their own time.

I never expected to 'put a dent' in the public's incredulity.
What I do hope to accomplish is to lay the foundation for the
next or future generations so that their climb will not be as
steep (or all uphill) as ours is.

Comfort yourself with the knowledge that we are telling the
truth. That one day (probably after we're all long gone) we will
be viewed as "Patriots of Humanity." People who were not afraid
to stand up, tell the truth, and face the formidable resistance
and rejection of our own peers. We have to take a lot of BS from
people, but (for them, and our own families) we must be patient,
understanding, and most of all,... endure. (Survive)

Hang in there kid. "Vindication Day" is coming. I am confident
that one day the presence of these beings and their machines
will all be a matter of 'common knowledge.'

Until then, we must continue to find ways to weather the storm
and to be strong.


Warm regards,

John Velez, In the same boat as you  ;)


                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                       Abductions And Dead Relatives?

From: Jesus Millan Arias <jesusmillan@eresmas.net>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:32:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:16:46 -0400
Subject: Abductions And Dead Relatives?


Hi,

I have a question for anyone on this very interesting List.

Please, can anyone tell me if really are related "Abductions"
with "presence of dead relatives"?. Some researchers, as
Freixedo, say really both are related, but I haven't found any
reference in my David Jacobs books.


Thank you,

Jesus Millan
jesusmillan@eresmas.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 16:47:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:18:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100

 >As for only the British being subject to the influence of the
 >tabloid Press version of UFOlogy - who are you kidding?  How
 >about the National Enquirer - weren't they offering a prize for
 >the best UFO yarn shortly before Travis Walton was 'abducted' ?

 >Of course, that sort of media hype couldn't happen back home,
 >only to the Brits!


Please read my post again. As I wrote, the Enquirer used to run
UFO stories, but that was years ago. It no longer does. None of
the American print tabloids do, except the Weekly World News,
which flagrantly makes everything up. There is very little - if
any - print coverage of current UFO reports anywhere in the US
tabloid press.

I also noted, you'll remember, that there was plenty of media
hype in the US about UFOs from the 50s through the 70s. But no
longer - at least if we're talking about print media and
non-tabloid TV.


Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                 Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Murray

From: Marty Murray <mmurray31@home.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 18:35:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 12:06:24 -0400
Subject: Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Murray


 >Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:44:13 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray


 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray
 >>Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:36:27 -0400


 >>>From: Luis R. Gonz?lez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray
 >>>Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:27:55 +0200

 >>>On November 12, 2000 I posted a comment answering (only half
 >>>tongue in cheek) Mr. Sandow's petition about a main SF film
 >>>showing abduction iconography but predating abductions.

 >>>I suggested "2001: A Space Odissey" but Mr. Sandow did not care
 >>>to comment, as usual with my arguments.

 >>>Well, by pure serendipity, I have discovered a new point for my
 >>>case.

 >>>We, HPS-ers, have long pointed to Whitley Strieber's best seller
 >>>"Communion" as the main culprit for spreading the Grey face
 >>>image (with its big black eyes) all over the world, in the cover
 >>>of his book.

 >>>But now, I have discovered that 20 years before, another alien
 >>>face stared to the people (at least in the USA). This face
 >>>showed a big head, a small nose, a simple line as mouth and two
 >>>big human eyes. It was the Star Child from the 2001 film.

 >>>Reading a Spanish book about the Kubrick film (pag. 72, "2001.
 >>>La Odisea continoa", Raul Alda, Ediciones Jaguar, Madrid, 2001,
 >>>ISBN: 84-89960-83-6) I found myself staring at a frontal
 >>>close-up of the Star Child's face in an Americam promotional
 >>>poster of the time, under the heading "the ultimate trip".

 >>>Exactly, up to the _normal_ eyes, as Travis Walton described his
 >>>aliens.

<snip>

John Velez replied:

 >Hi Jan, hi All,

 >Jan, don't you think that comparing that very human looking
 >fetus in 2001 to "grey aliens" is 'stretching the taffy' a bit
 >thin? I agree that there may be 'some' number of folks out there
 >that have been influenced or affected by 'media contamination.'
 >But I suspect that the 'contamination' has more to do with the
 >more recent and detailed reports of UFO abduction rather than in
 >the obscure imagery of movies from the 50's.

Howdy John, Jan & All,

I don't know about the rest of you, but the first encounter I
ever had with a picture of a "gray" was the drawings done by
Barney and Betty Hill of their captors, which I saw in an
excerpt from 'The Interrupted Journey' in 'Weekend' magazine,
back in the late 60's. I was only about 11 or 12 at the time,
but their drawings remained vivid in my mind. Shortly afterwards
I read another book written by twin brothers (their names, and
the name of the book, I don't recall now) which described
abductions by gray aliens, and sometime in that timeframe also I
came across the Villas Boras account. Certainly these accounts
weren't widely shown on the media, as such things are now, but
Weekend magazine was read across Canada and I'm sure these
drawings were seen by millions of people.

I think a lot of people were quite familiar with the image of
what gray aliens are supposed to look like long before the
Strieber book cover. I know I was. I actually laughed out loud
when I saw that cover for the first time! Steven Spielberg, in
creating 'Close Encounters', was only copying accounts which
were well-known and widely available at the time, not the other
way around, as some have suggested.


Take care,

Marty Murray









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

             Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 20:20:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 14:54:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Cecchini


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:19:11 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >My apologies to any on this list who want to have nothing to do
 >with New Age topics, UFOs excepted. However, we really can't
 >discuss abductee experiences seriously unless we acknowledge
 >possible reality of paranormal phenomena that accompany them,
 >and these include New Age topics. Some fraction of UFO
 >abductions are seen to be OBEs,

<snip>

 >Here is the short bibliography. For more, see my website file
 >below.

Don't forget Ray Fowler's

'The Watchers II : Exploring UFOs and the Near-Death Experience'

which... well, the title says it all.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                         A Web Archive For Ufology?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:27:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 14:56:50 -0400
Subject: A Web Archive For Ufology?


Ladies & Gentlemen:

Recently there was a long series of threads which addressed the
question of what kind of council or method could enhance UFO
research. I asked what kind of efforts along this line were used
by science, nowadays, using the Internet.

Please see this article in today's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/01/science/01ARCH.html?pagewanted=1

We have them but how does this differ from our discussion
groups? Is there an expected format?

Comments?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                          Filer's Files #18 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:44:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:00:52 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #18 -- 2000



Filer's Files #18 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
May 1, 2001, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, Majorstar@aol.com.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,

UFOs ARE REPORTED AROUND THE WORLD -- Large 'motherships' and
smaller UFOs are being reported from almost every state
including Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Ohio,
Indiana, Louisiana, Texas, plus Columbia, England, Germany,
Brunei, and Australia. Intense solar flare activity blasting
radiation millions of miles into space has created speculation
that the UFOs are coming into Earth's atmosphere for protection.
The US Air Force investigated UFOs for twenty years admitting to
more than ten thousand sightings. Despite intensive
investigation almost ten percent remain unexplained. Congressman
Gerald Ford asked Congress to investigate UFOs in 1966, is now
the time?

DISCLOSURE PROJECT CALLS FOR HEARINGS BY CONGRESS

To hold open, secrecy-free hearings on the UFO/Extraterrestrial
presence on and around Earth. To hold open hearings on advanced
energy and propulsion systems that, when publicly released, will
provide solutions to global environmental challenges. To enact
comprehensive legislation to research, develop and explore space
peacefully and cooperatively with all cultures on Earth and in
space. The recorded testimony of scores of military, government,
and other witnesses to Unidentified Flying Objects and
Extraterrestrial events and projects from around the world
establishes the existence of an UFO/Extraterrestrial presence on
and around Earth. This recorded testimony consists of dozens of
firsthand, often top-secret witnesses to UFO and
Extraterrestrial events, internal UFO-related government
projects and covert activities, space-based weapons programs,
Extraterrestrial Intelligence, and covert, reverse-engineered
energy and propulsion system projects.

The technologies that are of an Extraterrestrial origin, when
publicly released within a planned transition period, will
provide solutions to global environmental and security
challenges. These numerous recorded witnesses constitute only a
small portion of a vast pool of identified present or former
military, intelligence, corporate, aviator, flight control, law
enforcement officers, scientists and other witnesses, who will
come forward when subpoenaed to testify at US Congressional
hearings. Without a grant of immunity releasing them from their
security oaths, many such unimpeachable witnesses fear to speak
out. This will provide unprecedented benefits and opportunities
to all on Earth and in space. Contact: Alfred Webre
604-733-8134 or Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302

Editor's Note: I will be one of the speakers on May 9 in
Washington, DC to request hearings. Former President Ford told
me that he was never provided information on UFOs despite his
requests as Speaker of the House, Vice President and as
President of the United States.

CONNECTICUT CIGAR MOTHERSHIP SPOTTED

KENSINGTON -- On April 13, 2001, the witness was out walking
about 10:45 PM when she saw a glowing object that looked like a
diamond shooting star, only it wasn't shooting. The witness
started to look more closely. She said, it kind of spooked me
out a first, because it wasn't making a noise and it was flying
low. Then I walked onto another street when it started coming
closer going towards the center of town, (Berlin). As it flew in
that direction I saw that it was sort of a cigar shaped object
with no blinking lights, just solid red and white lights. I
continued walking towards my house and then I noticed another
one coming from the same direction. I saw this person in a car
and I asked them to stop. The girl was kind of freaked out that
I was stopping her at night. "Look at that!" She goes "Its a
plane" and I'm like "NO! Its something else, I just saw another
one." She was very skeptical. I watched it go towards the same
direction as the first. The second object had the same
description as the first. 1.) At first it looked like a glowing
Diamond sort of thing. 2.) It had solid red and white lights.
3.) The craft were kind of cigar shaped. 4.) Both flew very low
about the altitude of a helicopter. 5.) They weren't making a
sound. The lady who stopped asked to use my cell phone to call
her friend that lived in the area. Thanks to Peter Davenport,
Director National Reporting Center. <A
HREF="http://www.ufocenter.com/">NUFORC</A> <A
HREF="http://www.buybooksontheweb.com ">Jesus UFOs</A>

"WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE?" CONTESTANT SAW UFO

On Sunday night April 29, 2001, Regis Philbin the host of the
most popular game show on television "Who Wants to be a
Millionaire" asked the contestant to tell about her UFO
sighting. The contestant mentioned briefly her UFO encounter
near Pine Bush, New York. The audience chuckled, so she pointed
out that she wasn't a kook!

NEW JERSEY HUGE DISC

WEST BERLIN -- Mrs. D'Imperio writes, at 9:30 PM on September
12, 2000, our family saw a very huge lighted disc up in the sky.
My brother in-law shouted for the family to come out on the
deck. We all looked up and saw a lighted wheel with what looked
like bicycle spokes coming out of it. Another ring was on the
outside. What amazed me was lights were coming down the spokes
going around the outside of the other ring coming back to where
they started and coming together all of them in the center of
the ring. They kept repeating this action. Then from another
direction of the sky came a second object that joined going
around the circle but making another spoke. As we watched for
some time two helicopters came overhead. One was bigger then the
other and went straight for what we were watching. They were
flying around for a while. If I attempted to draw the UFO, it
would look like a wheel within a wheel with lights going around
and coming together in the middle. I posted this information on
the web. Thanks to Mrs. D'Imperio at alian 10094@aol.com

VIRGINIA FLYING ORBS

ROANOKE -- Andy and Robin Hodge report seeing flying yellowish
white round orb like objects? We saw two together while out on
my deck April 23, 2001. They were close together and moving so
fast I barely caught a glimpse before they were behind the
clouds. They were definitely not conventional aircraft. They
could have been meteors but do they travel together in twos? I
saw no tail, just round fast moving yellowish white lights that
looked like orb shapes. There were many airplanes out during
this time, but none could move that fast! Thanks to Robin at
ahodge@roava.net

OHIO GLOBE AND POSSIBLE INTERCEPT

CADIZ - The witness was coming home from work on April 19, 2001,
when he noticed a white light globe off in the distance over my
house at 11:55 PM. He states, it is very unusual for craft to
fly low over my small town residence. As I got closer to my home
the globe started moving very quickly across the sky. It would
move east then stop on a dime and move west, stop again and go
straight up and east. I pulled in my drive way and the white
light globe lowered itself to three miles away. It hovered again
and the white light turned red. It stood there for a few seconds
then started west, the red light began flashing fast like a
strobe light, and it just vanished. I live outside of town with
few lights and I could hear dogs all over town barking. When the
light vanished all the dogs stopped barking. Two days ago at
midnight I was watching TV when my entire house started shaking
very faintly though enough that my candles were vibrating off
the window." The witness is a very respected person in his
community with a degree in law enforcement. He ran inside
grabbed his camcorder and drove to the top of the hill where you
can see for miles, but the light never came back.

OHIO UFO INTERCEPT -- James Greenen a MUFON field investigator
reports that on April 24, and 25, 2001, on paltalk.com an
Internet chatroom a gentleman who runs that sight that had a UFO
fly over his car. The UFO stopped his car. He observed a F-15 at
full throttle with wings back and afterburners on, break sound
barrier and pull up along side of the UFO that suddenly made a
quick left hand turn in front of the F-15, and the pilot almost
lost it. His dad observed a UFO the night before and got
pictures of it. He needs help investigating this sighting. The
control towers in a couple of cities around him have told him
that the information is none of his business. Stop by on
paltalk.com and join the group. The gentleman's name is
nighthawk. Thanks to James Greenen MUFON FI iufoc@zoomph.net

INDIANA ORANGE HOVERING FLYING TRIANGLE AND DISC

MIDDLETOWN -- We noticed an orange colored light in the sky
straight ahead on April 19, 2001, so we watched it for about
twenty minutes at 4:30 AM. The light appeared to be in a
triangular formation. A plane flew underneath the UFO and as it
went under the red lights appeared on the UFO as if it were
giving a warning. The UFO started moving slowly at first gaining
speed toward the right and then it came to a stop and hovered
for about five minutes. Then a small star shaped object branched
off of it and started flying straight up and around as if it
were in orbit with the earth, but still in the atmosphere. The
star shaped light disappeared, but we continued to watch the
other object as it started moving further away and disappeared.
It was neither a plane nor a star and I have never seen any
thing like this before.

CLOSE TO ILLINOIS STATE LINE -- The witness on April 18, 2001,
was traveling on Interstate 90 in Indiana, and noticed a cross
like or star like object in the sky. It was very bright opaque
white and larger than surrounding stars. The object was above
horizon as we traveled late in the night. The object rose
vertically and moved in the opposite direction we were
traveling. I moved forward in my seat, turned my head upward and
to the left as it passed over the roof of the vehicle. When the
object was passing I got a good side view and a bit of the back
of the object. The witness stated, "There were many small red
lights curved around the base and the lights flashed on either
side of the craft." The flashes possibly obscured more red
lights on the far side. The red lights curving gave the
impression that the object was circular or at least the base was
circular. I viewed a bright, white cross like or star like
object with many smaller red lights. I will confirm time with my
spouse. Peter Davenport of NUFORC spoke with this witness, and
found her to be quite lucid and serious-minded in her
description of the event. <A
HREF="http://www.ufocenter.com/">NUFORC</A>

ILLINOIS TITANIC TEAR APPEARED WITH A GUST & VANISHED.

SCHAUMBURG -- I was outside on my roof at 2:18 AM on April 15,
2001, because that is the time the ship Titanic sank 89 years
ago. Well, I was looking up at the stars wondering how those
people felt when I saw a flash of light come from behind me. I
got scared because I thought it was lightning, and I turned
north to see for sure. There were no clouds or anything, so I
turned around. Maybe 30 seconds later it happened again and this
time I felt a gust of wind also from the North. I looked up
towards the sky and saw a bright shiny object moving very
slightly in the sky. It was almost diamond/tear shaped and
definitely not a planet, star or satellite. I'm in an astronomy
class and I know the difference between the three objects.
Therefore, I was a little scared and curious. I stood up and
waved at it, and then it disappeared. Peter Davenport notes
that, if this event occurred, we question whether it had
anything to do with the sinking of the Titanic.

LOUISIANA ROUND LIGHT

On April 25, 2001, at 9: 02 PM Carol sighted an object coming
from the west. The object appeared red and white kind of blended
together flying fairly high at a pretty fast speed, and faster
than most planes. It got behind the many trees in the front yard
and I walked to the other side of the yard and saw it again.
Carol states, "It was a larger solid round white light moving at
the same speed gliding smoothly along as they usually do."
Before leaving my sight flying southeast, it again turned to the
red mixed with white color. It became smaller and continued on
the same flight path. Sighting lasted approximately two minutes.
Thanks to Carolncbuckallew@cp-tel.net skyopen@yahoogroups.com

TEXAS LARGE OVAL FLYING OBJECT

GRAHAM -- Donna B. writes that on April 24, 2001, at
approximately 10:30 AM, I observed a large oval object in the
southeastern sky; it was silver in color and was hovering.
Cannot determine how high it was. It "faded" instead of blinking
out this time. There wasn't time to grab binoculars and camera,
unfortunately. Have observed this type of UFO before, but have
never seen them just fade. Thanks to Donna B. djb0898@wf.net

COLOMBIA THREE UFOs OVER CAPITAL

BOGOT -- William Chavez reports that on April 23, 2001, at 4:15
p.m., three objects of unknown origin were seen flying over
Bogot where more than 3,000 people in the city's business
district witnessed them. The objects were in the vicinity of
Cerro El Cable Hill where they remained motionless for four
minutes. Radio broadcaster "Radiodifusora Nacional" and Todelar
phoned Contacto OVNI, our research organization, to discuss this
sighting live, and because in recent years this type of
phenomenon has become increasingly common. Last March, a
"mothership" was captured on video over Barrio Santa Isabel.
When the video was analyzed it was possible to see a large
tubular object at an altitude of 10,000 feet. This object also
headed toward Bogot's Cerro El Cable Hill. On April 15th, Mr.
Oscar Berrio filmed a disc-shaped object in the vicinity of El
Dorado Airport, and we are investigating this sighting. Thanks
to SHnSASSY1 and Contacto OVNI Translation (C) 2001. William
Chavez www.epagos.com/contacto-ovni

UNITED KINGDOM 23RD UFO SEEN OVER DALES IS GIANT DISC

DERBYSHIRE, ENGLAND -- Andy Darlington of the Matlock Mercury
Newspaper writes, "The mystery of UFO sightings over the Peaks
and Dales shows no signs of abating after the 23rd reported
sighting in the last eight months." Since September, locals have
spoken of strange lights, flying saucers, and huge triangular
craft in the skies. One was even caught on video. Now a
34-year-old Wirksworth man, who asked not to be named, says he
saw a giant disk-shaped craft over Idridgehay. He was driving to
market in Derby at 3:00 AM when he saw the UFO hovering near the
road. In addition, he was the first person who'd seen the UFOs
to admit feeling afraid by what he saw. "It did frighten me
because I couldn't explain what it was," he remarked. "I've
never seen anything like this before and logic couldn't explain
it. It was shocking. I've never been believer in UFOs and
sightings but I believe in them now." The man said the craft was
hovering above woods and seemed to rotate. It had blue, red, and
white lights. The incident follows another sighting of three
flying saucers above Youlgrave last Wednesday. Thanks to Gerry @
Farshores

GERMANY HAS 40 UFO SIGHTINGS

MANNHEIM -- Christian Siedenbiedel reports that the German UFO
Registration Office run by Werner Walter has been stressed out
since the beginning of February. "A new UFO craze has started in
Germany," groans the 43-year-old man who has headed the Office
for the past 10 years. "Forty unidentified flying objects in six
weeks -- that's more than in 1999 and 2000 put together." Mr.
Walter puts some of the blame for this latest wave of UFO
hysteria on increased television coverage of the crash of the
Russian Mir space station, the planet Venus, and disco
searchlights. Even the police called on one occasion; claim they
had pursued a UFO in their patrol car. These were most likely
the searchlights. A woman in the town of KONSTANZ, claimed she
had seen a cylindrical object that was several hundred meters
(yards) long above her on the market square in broad daylight.
Someone in Hamburg observed a "classical" flying saucer with a
diameter of 30 meters (100 feet). An "extraterrestrial theme
park" is even being built for millions in Switzerland. Thanks to
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Apr. 23, 2001.

BRUNEI UFO SIGHTING

GADONG -- On April 26, 2001, a husband and wife claimed that
they had seen an unknown flying object in Gadong's airspace at
around 12:30 AM. They were on their way home from a dinner
occasion when Philip Chua, 33, and wife, Silvia Goh Mei Ling,
28, were shocked by the bright object in the skies. They had
earlier seen the UFO around the area of Jalan Tungku Link.
Coincidentally, he had a camera with him. He stopped his car and
took pictures of the object, but the object vanished as if 'it'
knew someone was taking pictures of 'it'. He said when
interviewed by Media Permata. Upon passing a bridge near
Emperor's Court, the wife claimed that they saw an object that
appeared again near Rimba, The next day; Chua sent the film to
his friend's shop to be developed. Strangely, while his friend
was processing the film, the shop's power was cut off for an
hour. However, Chua felt relief as the object was captured on
the film. He spread the word around his friends. Translated via
<bowwow@zxmail.com Thanks to Gerry Farshores
 >http://farshores.topcities.com/farshores/ufobrun.htm

AUSTRALIA FLYING TRIANGLE

SALT ASH, NSW -- Darryyll Jones writes that he holds an ultra
light pilots license and a yachtsman so he is more aware of the
sky. On April 26, 2001, 15 miles north of Newcastle. I was
looking at the sky with a friend at 8:00 PM when a huge
triangular outlined shape formed by white lights, mostly on the
leading edge, but enough on the trailing edge to define this
boomerang outline, flew directly over head. It had to be
massive. My first impression was that it was between 10,000 to
30,000 feet high. It was 5 degrees wide, silent and flew
straight with no ionization trail. Suddenly it was gone like the
lights went out. Only minute's later single lights began
scribing perfect arc's between 40 to 80 degrees south, first in
one direction then the other in exactly the same circuit, then
they too were gone. They were making a crescent shape as they
too were fading out in the western portion of their arc. I have
wracked my brain for an explanation such birds, aircraft, or
asteroids. My friend and I sat down and made notes that were
near identical. We concluded the most likely explanation was a
mother ship and the single orbs somehow came from it.

I am still far from satisfied with that explanation though. As
the military aircraft from a nearby RAAF base were out in larger
than normal numbers, the three helicopters and possibly five
F18's might have been a laser type focused display. The triangle
was "flying" in the direction of the base. My friend was looking
the other way when I spotted the triangle approaching. He got
two and a half seconds to observe it, while I got five. We
agreed on what we saw. The orbs were around for 13 passes for
three minutes at very high speed. They dimmed out as they headed
west for the sun now over the horizon, suggesting again deep
space objects. The main group and then fractured and returned to
earth much like fighter pilots peel off. There was a small storm
in the distance with heavy lightning that continued all night.
Others claim to regularly see the big triangle inland at
Bathurs.  Thanks to Darryyll Jones
vital.earth@hunterlink.net.au. Editor's Note: Two well qualified
witnesses observed a UFO. The craft may be stationed at the
nearby air base or pulling into our atmosphere for protection
from unusually heavy solar flares emanating from our sun.

SPACE TOURIST DENNIS TITO CHECKS INTO SPACE STATION

US businessman Dennis Tito paid the Russians $20 million to go
into space. He blasted off successfully in the Soyuz TM-32
spacecraft and became the first space tourist when. He and his
two cosmonaut crewmates successfully docked with the
international space station on April 30, as the two vehicles
sailed 240 miles above central Asia. Tito says, "I love space."
The 60 year-old apparently had no problems adjusting to space.
"It was a great trip here." The US strongly opposed the trip by
an American civilian. It will be interesting to find out what he
sees in space. Thanks to Space Flight
http://spaceflightnow.com/station/stage6a/010430fd12/

TAIWAN HEROIC DOGFIGHT

This is a translation of a Taiwan Daily Gazette article. "In a
heroic dogfight fought over international waters off the
mainland China coast, a 60s era American-built Lockheed Electra
propeller airliner with 24 US Navy passengers/observers aboard
chewed up one of China's best state-of-the-art supersonic
fighter aircraft. The Americans, utilizing the infrequently seen
combat tactic of straight and level flight, often accomplished
by relying solely on autopilot, engaged the unfortunate single
seat combat jet and knocked it out of the air using only one of
its four formidable rotating air mass propellers. After the
action, the crew and passengers/observers dropped in on China's
Hainan Island Resort, for some much-deserved R&R as guests of
the Chinese government. Reprinted from the Taiwan Daily Gazette
by staff writer One Wing Lo, Ray (WA4RLB) and Brenda Burt

THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION

David E. Twichell writes, "The ancient astronaut and Biblical
UFO hypotheses are not new. However, no one seems to want to
take the matter to the next logical step. If Ezekiel's, "wheel
within a wheel," and Moses', "pillar of fire and cloud," were
forerunners of today's UFOs, then the Star of Bethlehem and the
brilliant cloud to which Jesus ascended must be treated in the
same vein. When Biblical descriptions of anomalous aerial
phenomena are overlaid on that of modern-day UFO reports, the
picture seems to meld as one. Once the evidence has been
presented, the reader is led to a conclusion that is at best
convincing and at least thought provoking. Are you willing to
risk having your worldview shaken? Read the preface free at:

http://hometown.aol.com/fi4mufon/myhomepage/index.html

To order your copy of THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION, go to:

http://www.buybooksontheweb.com

http://www.ufocenter.com/

Or Save the shipping charges and order your autographed copy by
sending a check or money order for $13.95 (US) per copy to:
David Twichell, P.O. Box 511, Trenton MI. 48183-0511

PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO photographs available
and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy Commander Graham
Bethune. $10.00. Send check or money order to G. Filer 222
Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055. CD OF FILER'S FILES for
the last four years 1997 through 2000 is available for $25.00.
Both for $30.00.

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
were caught on recent Shuttle video footage. Jeff has over an
hour-long tape of UFOs shot in space. Jeff spends hundreds of
hours watching the shuttle broadcasts from space and is now an
expert on NASA missions and even those onboard the shuttle are
unlikely to see what Jeff does. Using Jeff's directions you will
be able to learn the difference between space junk, ice crystals
and real UFOs. One segment has 24 UFOs watching the shuttle from
space. I feel confident we could go into a court of law and
convince any jury, UFOs are moving around our Earth. Send $25
to: Jeff Challender 2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento, California
95833-2011.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $30 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2001 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the
files on their Web Sites provided they credit the newsletter and
its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. Caution: Most of these are initial reports and require
further investigation. These reports and comments are not
necessarily the official MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters to
Majorstar@Aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants permission
for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to
keep your name, address, or story confidential.














   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 21:31:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:25:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >(Incidently: regarding brightly reflecting pelicans, here is a
 >comparison: imagine a piece of white paper 3 feet square that as
 >been oiled to give it a slight shininess and imagine that paper
 >to be a mile away in the direction OPPOSITE to the sun. Now
 >decide for yourself whether or not it could appear as bright as
 >a sun glint from a mirror or as a welder's arc.

 >If you've never seen either, I suggest you find a small mirror
 >and have someone at a distance from you turn it until you get a
 >reflection from the sun. A 1 inch mirror at a hundred feet, for
 >example. Compare this with a piece of white paper the same size
 >and distance. we want a full report and the results will be on
 >the next test.

Hi, Bruce, Dave, et. al.:

How about this one? Take a white, oiled, 3-foot diameter paper
as described above, and behind it, at an additional distance of
25 miles, tilt a 5600 square foot glacial snow and ice field at
a 60 degree angle away, but so that it reflects the Sun's rays
in the direction of the observer. But, make certain that the
observer is not looking at it, but only detects the flash with
peripheral vision, as Arnold claimed.

Pop Quiz: Would the flash attract the attention of the observer
to the flying paper Pelicans?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 21:52:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:28:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

<snip>

 >I've seen several examples lately of the simplest explanations
 >for UFO sightings. Meteors that descend then climb from low
 >altitudes-an unproven theory.

Don:

That theory may have been yours. As I recall about the
Chiles-Whitehead incident, the pilots reported the thing was
coming _toward_ them, not decending, then they reported that it
rose and disappeared as they dove the airplane. I recall someone
else pointing out that they reported the object disappeared, and
that a meteor travelling in a relatively flat trajectory and
then burning out or disappearing behind clouds could seem to be
rising and disappearing to a pilot diving a plane and looking
out the window.

 >Ball lightening-another unproven phenomenon.

No, the problem is finding the right explanation, not proving
the existance of the phenomenon.

<snip>

 >Swamp gas. [This one we know exists but how come we never see
 >reports by people claiming they've seen swamp gas?]

I see this one appearing all the time on this and other Lists.
Do you have a list of all of the people who have ever tried to
use this one on a UFO incident? Any skeptics there?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Disclosure Project Press Release

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 16:06:34 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project Press Release



PRG Paradigm Research Group

[Forward of Press
Released received by PRG.]

PRESS RELEASE - April 26, 2001

THE DISCLOSURE PROJECT

For Immediate Release

MILITARY,  AGENCY WITNESSES TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY ON
EXTRATERRESTRIAL PRESENCE; CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS SOUGHT

Washington, DC - On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military,
intelligence, government, c orporate and scientific witnesses
will come forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC
to establish the reality of UFOs as extraterrestrial vehicles,
the presence of advanced extraterrestrial life forms, and
sequestered advanced energy and propulsion technologies.  The
weight of this firsthand testimony, along with supporting
government documentation and other evidence, will establish
without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to
Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Proje ct, which
is hosting the event.

The Disclosure Project [http://www.disclosureproject.org], a
nonprofit research organization, is calling for open
Congressional hearings taking testimony on events and evidence
relating to an extraterrestrial presence. The only Congressional
hearings held previously were conducted in 1968 by the House
Science and Astronautics Committee (90th Congress, 2nd Session,
Committee Print No. 7. "Symposium Unidentified Flying
Objects.";)

The Project has identified several hundred wit nesses throughout
the world and spanning every branch of the armed services,  the
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), DIA, CIA, NASA, Russia.
UK, and other agencies and countries.   Over 100 have been
videotaped; 70 have been transcribed into edited testimony.
Videotaped summary of the testimony and an in-depth briefing
document with witness transcripts will be available at the press
conference.

Among the witnesses attending the event are:John Callahan,
former Division Chief of the Accidents and Investi gations
Branch, FAA; Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and
NRO operative with cosmic top secret clearance; Dr. Carol Rosin,
space missile defense consultant and former spokesperson for
Wernher Von Braun; Major George A. Filer III, former Air Force
Intelligence; Graham Bethune,

retired Navy commander pilot with a top-secret clearance;
Michael Smith, former Air Traffic Controller, US Air Force;
Sergeant Clifford Stone, United States Army; Lt. Col. Robert
Salas, former SAC Launch Controller, US Air Force and FAA.

"These testimonies establish once and for all that we are not
alone.  Technologies related to extraterrestrial phenomena are
capable of providing solutions to the global energy crisis, and
other environmental and security challenges," says Dr. Greer.

The Disclosure team and selected witnesses will be meeting with
members of Congress and conducting briefings to address these
issues and call for legislation.

Wednesday, May 9th
8 - 9 AM Continental Breakfast,
9:00AM - 11:00 AM - Overview by Dr. Greer; Witness Presentations;
Release of Statement for Congress; Questions Ballroom -The
National Press Club 529 14th Street NW
- 13th Floor Washington, D.C

NOTE: This press conference may be viewed
live on the Internet, on
May 9th from 9 to 11 a.m. EDT, by WEBCAST at the
following web site:

http://www.connectlive.com/events/disclosureproject

Disclosure Project Contact: Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302
Media Relations: Janet Donovan 202-822-9318

ceiinfo@erols.com

Forwarded by: Stephen Bassett
Paradigm Research Group
301-990-4290









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                CCCRN News: 05-01-01 Research Assistance 2001

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 00:01:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:26:15 -0400
Subject: CCCRN News: 05-01-01 Research Assistance 2001


CCCRN NEWS
The E-News Service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

May 1, 2001

_____________________________


RESEARCH ASSISTANCE 2001


The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is seeking the
continued assistance of farmers, media, pilots, police/RCMP,
scientists, the general public and other researchers in its
investigative efforts.


Reporting Formations

Reports of crop circles or other formations, including
additional supporting materials, may be submitted to the main
office in BC or any of the respective provincial branches (BC,
Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec). Report
forms are available on request or a copy can be downloaded.
Please include as much detail as possible. It is urgently
requested that reports be forwarded as soon after discovery as
possible so that a proper investigation may be initiated. In
Canada, most formations are reported in August and September,
near or at harvest, primarily in Saskatchewan, although they can
be reported year-round (in grasses or even ice, for example). 12
formations were reported across the country in 2000, in Alberta,
Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec. Full reports are in
the Circle Phenomena in Canada 2000 report archive. See Circle
Phenomena in Canada 2001 for updates on current reports.


Field Research

For those interested in assisting with on-site investigations,
field research is conducted at circle locations as they are
found, including photo and video documentation (both aerial and
ground if possible), surveying and plant / soil sampling for lab
analysis, as well as investigation of other possibly related
phenomena. An excellent opportunity for hands-on experience with
this phenomenon! Field investigations are conducted in
cooperation with the BLT Research Team and other research
groups. Information on sampling protocols for lab analysis is
available from the BLT Research Team. All applicable laws are
strictly adhered to, and under no circumstance is a farmer's
field or other property entered without expressed permission.
Names and locations are kept confidential if requested and will
not be released publicly without permission in those cases.


Other Assistance

Additional volunteer assistance is also needed and welcomed,
including provincial coordinators for Newfoundland, Nova Scotia,
New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, as well as additional
field research assistants.


Resources

Extensive resources are available to all interested persons or
groups. Free e-mail updates are also available for those wanting
to keep up to date on the latest news and developments (CCCRN
News). Contact CCCRN for further information, to submit reports
or to become more involved.

____________________________


CCCRN News is the e-news service of the Canadian Crop Circle
Research Network, providing the latest news and reports on the
crop circle phenomenon in Canada and other relevant updates, as
well as other information on CCCRN-related news, projects and
events.


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH NETWORK

Main Office:
Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

Provincial Branch Contacts:
http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.html


� Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                                Roswell Piece

From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:29:29 -0400
Subject: Roswell Piece


Greetings List:

As many of you know, ufoxfiles.com is touting physical evidence
of the 1947 flying saucer crash in Roswell, NM. Details are to
be released in a forthcoming Internet webcast on May 12th.
However, photos and videos of the alleged "Roswell Piece" are
currently on the ufoxfiles website for viewing.

I have to admit that I am a bit taken aback with the
sensationalist approach surrounding the disclosure of this
event. Furthermore, as I read the information and watch the
videos regarding the alleged evidence, it appears to me that the
"Roswell Piece" may be nothing more than a polished piece of
meteorite. The results of scientific tests will need to go much
further than simply reporting an isotope analysis.

In one of the videos, Dr. Leir explains that the piece becomes
too hot to handle when placed in hot water and too cold to
handle when placed in ice water. I'm afraid this testimony does
more harm than good. It certainly is not what any scientist
would consider as objective experimental evidence and tends to
support the notion by mainstream science that ufologists are not
credible.

Should the so-called "Roswell Piece" end up having a more
prosaic explanation than debris from an alien-manufactured
extraterrestrial craft, the UFO skeptics will likely use this
event as evidence for how gullible UFO believers can be.

Therefore, I urge caution in accepting the conclusions drawn by
ufoxfiles until all evidence and alternatives are considered.


Tim Haley









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Ticchetti

From: Thiago L. Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 08:11:55 -0300 (BRT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:31:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Ticchetti




Hello people!

I just arrived from the International UFO Congress in Curitiba,
Parana's State that finished yesterday. There I made my first
speach in a such congress and watched the speach of Rodrigo
Fuenzelida (Chile), Virgil Armstrong (USA), Pablo Vilarrubia
(Spain) among others brazilians ufologists.

Well I spoke with Rodrigo and he told me that is emerging a
theory that the bodies found in the UFO crash site belonged to
americans children (orphans)that they used in experimental
aircrafts to see what happened in their organism.

That story drove me surprised. Someone had heard about it?


Regards,

Thiago










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger

From: Don Ledger  <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 11:32:17 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:34:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

You wrote:

 >As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >pathetic.

Why should that bother you?

And re the word - pathetic - there you go with the buzz words
again Dave. I notice debunkers just can't help it. Once someone
begins to question your motives or your reasoning you start with
the buzz words. Bile and venom-wow.

 >Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >so, years after his death. Food for thought!

A brilliant scientist, spouting nonesense - an knew it. More food
for thought.

Best,

Don Ledger









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:17:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +

 >As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >pathetic.

 >Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >so, years after his death.

 >Food for thought!

In which case you're dying of starvation, my friend.

What really is pathetic is the continuing silence of pelicanists
concerning Menzel's intellectual and ethical failings. McDonald
and others have richly documented Menzel's pseudoscientific
practices, which of course legions of camels will pass through
fields of needles before we see you and your fellow pelicanists
acknowledge even in whispers. You continue to ignore them and
act, weirdly but predictably, as if there were something wrong
with ufologists for daring to take issue with a man who, weirdly
but predictably, remains a debunking superhero.

Beyond that, consider this assessment of the man from a fellow
astronomer and noncombatant in the UFO wars:

"Menzel led a double life. The crusty astronomer was a
high-ranking agent of the National Security Agency..... He used
his position to blacken the reputations and damage the careers
of scientific opponents, produced fake research supporting his
masters, [and] betrayed his president [Eisenhower]..... The
seediest part of his career began in 1960. Menzel - still a
serving [intelligence] officer - offered to supply presidential
candidate John F. Kennedy with secret data on intelligence
activity during Ike's administration..... The files now reveal a
sordid stack of letters to JFK, abusing rivals and supposed
friends, and urging positions of authority be given to the
selfless Menzel. Many were." (Ian Seymour, in Astronomy Now,
December 1992)

In that general regard, it is worth noting that Menzel once
tried to get Blue Book to purchase the services of a consulting
group to take over its UFO work. Menzel somehow neglected to
mention that he had a considerable financial stake in the
organization - the sort of scam that has caused not a few to
end up facing federal charges and serving time The Air Force
found out about Menzel's gross conflict of interest only
accidentally. Menzel was personally, intellectually, _and_
financially corrupt.

What is it with debunkers that they just can't let go of one of
their own, however odious?  Aren't the rest of you glad you
aren't one of them? And why is it that Dave Clarke can't bring
himself to respond to Bruce Maccabee's clear and specific
criticisms of Menzel's methodology, preferring instead to turn
the usual tired pelicanist ad hominems on those aggravatingly
cheeky, iconoclastic ufologists? That's a rhetorical question,
by the way.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                         Re: Debunkers' Guidebook -

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:34:30 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:19:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook -


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100


 >As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >pathetic.

 >Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >so, years after his death.

 >Food for thought!


Dave,

As someone who knew and interacted with Menzel (he once gave me
a flying saucer tie!), you seem to be somewhat unaware of his
history of utterly unscientific behavior in regard to UFOs. Here
was a man, nominally a scientist, who acted as anything but.
Yet, he was profoundly influential in waving other scientists
and important people off of the UFO subject because Harvard
Observatory was attached to his name. He richly deserves to be a
"villain" from the perspective of those of us who take UFO
reports seriousl.

As to alleged "bile and venom" directed at him on this list, can
you give me a few examples? All I recall is some sharp, and
richly deserved, criticism. His "fireflies trapped in an
airliner windshield" explanation for the 1952 Nash-Fortenberry
case and the like are "food for thought." There were ground
witnesses by the way, and the objects were seen through more
than one window. Menzel literally ranted and raved in public
about "UFO nonsense" to the degree that some people feared for
his health.

Why would a scientist behave so irrationally about UFOs? He
epitomized everything that is wrong about the skeptical
position, carried to an incredible extreme.

--Dick Hall








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                 Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 12:29:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:22:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Sandow


 >From: Jesus Millan Arias <jesusmillan@eresmas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Abductions And Dead Relatives?
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:32:56 +0200


 >Please, can anyone tell me if really are related "Abductions"
 >with "presence of dead relatives"?. Some researchers, as
 >Freixedo, say really both are related, but I haven't found any
 >reference in my David Jacobs books.

For those who believe abductions aren't physically real, the
connection is very natural. That is, abductees aren't really
having encounters with anyone or anything - it's all in their
minds. So they can imagine dead relatives visiting along with
the aliens.

For abduction researchers who do believe abductions are real,
these reports obviously pose a problem. Budd Hopkins has had one
case I know of in which an abductee claimed to see dead
relatives. He may have had more cases like that, and Dave may
have, too. Budd believed - and he says the abductee came to
agree - that the dead relatives were just a "screen memory" for
aliens. Dave would say the same thing, I'm sure.

Skeptics quite rightly ask how Budd and Dave can be sure - and
of course wonder whether Budd and Dave lead abductees to reject
the idea of dead relatives, simply because they themselves (Budd
and Dave, I mean) don't believe in them.

 From an abduction believer's point of view, the connection seems
bizarre. Ghost reports are one thing, abduction reports are
another. Why should there be a connection? Besides, Budd and
Dave (and probably many other abduction investigators) don't
believe in ghosts. (Skeptics will naturally giggle when they
read that, asking - and this is a question worth looking at -
why ghost reports should be any less credible than abduction
reports. Isaac Asimov rather famously asked why people who
believe UFOs are alien shouldn't also believe in ghosts.)

On the other hand, abductions appear to take place - if we
assume they're real - in an altered state of consciousness.
Abductees remember the abductions imperfectly. Their memories
can get tangled with fantasies and dreams. If some of the
memories are recalled under hypnosis, there's a great liklihood
of hypnotic confabulation, in which the abductees simply make
stuff up, mixing the invented material in with their real
memories (again assuming, for the sake of argument, that some of
the memories are real).

Under these circumstances, it's easy to see how somebody could
imagine seeing dead relatives, and mixing that in with real
abduction memories. This is especially true if people - like
many abductees, at least in my experience - don't like the idea
that they're being abducted. It's much more comfortable to
imagine that the weird beings around your bed are something
friendly, like the ghosts of your mother and father.

Of course,  maybe the aliens really do bring the spirits of the
dead along on their abduction visits. I'd rule out every other
possibility before believing that one, though.


Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 2

              Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:52:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:34:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:19:11 -0700
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

<snip>

 >Presumably it is one's psychic awareness, often called the
 >spirit or soul, that is communicated with in this. For more
 >general information on this, I would recommend reading about
 >verified past-life recalls.

 >Now I find I must apologize also to those associated with an
 >organized religion that does not accept the concept of
 >reincarnation, for raising this subject. However, Christianity
 >at least accepts the concept of the human spirit, and these
 >studies tell a lot more about it. The research findings of Ian
 >Stevenson are particularly illuminating on this. Past-life
 >recalls are obviously related to NDEs and OBEs, since some of
 >the latter involve memories of the between-life state and these
 >mesh well with descriptions of NDE memories.

There have also been studies of cases where there is an overlap
between the life of the deceased person and and that of the
person doing the "recalling".  Obviously, in such circumstances
"reincarnation" in its classic sense cannot have occurred -
since both people were alive concurrently prior to the recall
(although they did not know each other).

Some of these cases seem to involve an actual "personailty
switch", whereby the personality of the dead person overrides
that of the "recipient" on a sporadic or even permanent basis.

This may indicate that memories have some form of independent
existence, and that some powerful mechanism exists for
"injecting" those memories into the minds of unwilling
recipients.

Pushing the hypothetical boat out a little further...

As classic "past life recall" cases suggest that "independent
memories" can be transferred irrespective of the passage of
time, there is no reason to believe that these memories could
*only* come from the past.  Furthermore, as many "past life"
cases seem to involve the recollection of traumatic events - any
such memories that arrive from "the future" could also be biased
towards the traumatic.

This leads to the hypothesis that the "alien abduction
experience" could be one of "preincarnation" - and that the
traumatic memories are those from a time when humans *are* being
used as guinea pigs in horrendous experiments by uncaring ETs.

Of course, this doesn't mean that the experience would be any
less "real".

BTW, William of Occam had a beard...   ;-)


--
David G Bolton
<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 2

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 23:57:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook


Hi Don,

 >I've noticed whenever a debunker has a weak argument they
 >immediatly trot out statements like the following - the idea of
 >ET UFOs on faith alone, and who may have a taste for critical
 >thinking noticeably absent from the monotous and servings
 >receive from the Ufological choir - or the next smear about the
 >so-called believers or the ETHers. Don't you people ever get
 >tiered ofg that nonesense. Is there special course and then an
 >exam you have to take to qualify.

What is it with you and the word "debunker"? It's almost like a
mantra that you invoke whenever you hear something you don't
like.

Why do you have to resort to pigeonholing someone simply because
they hold a different point of view?

And if I am such a "debunker", then how come I've just finished
reading your new book "Dark Object" and have reached the
conclusion that the Shag Harbour case is one of the most
baffling on record?

Is it possible in your philosophy to have a 'middle ground' or
has it always got to be that you either 'buy' the Corporate
conception of ufology or else you are a 'debunker.'

It's almost as bad as being back in the schoolyard, and this is

What all this amounts to is that no matter how open minded one
is, nothing less than total acceptance of the Corporate line is
sufficient. That sounds like "faith" to me, however it is
dressed up and presented.

 >Occams razor. The principle that the simplest explanation is
 >likely the right one. Here's one for you. RV Jones of British
 >Scientific Intelligence had a vested interest in making his
 >statements [and being insulting to boot-an obvious
 >disinformation ploy] about the UFO phenonmenon-it being that
 >they had too much intelligence on the phenomenon to be straight
 >with the electorate. As an employee of the intelligence
 >community, he is obviously suspect, and was selling you a bill
 >of goods.

So basically what you're saying is that anything we are told by
Intelligence sources that relates to negative conclusions must
be disinformation, by definition.

But betcha if it was the other way around, and Jones was telling
us that the British Government knew "the Truth" about ETs and
had seen evidence of crashed saucers hidden away in RAF hangars,
then suddenly this "disinformation" would become interesting -
perhaps even evidence of a British MJ-12, I'd wager.

No one would question Jones's motives then, because he would be
saying exactly what you wanted to hear.

A circular argument if I ever heard one.

As for what's in it for me - that's a good question, I guess
that like RV Jones, I'm fascinated by this subject not because
of an interest in UFOs per se, whether they exist or not, I have
no emotional investment in that at all because I haven't got a
clue - I'm simply interested in _why_ people believe they exist,
and the lengths they will go to pursuade and in some cases,
browbeat, others into adopting their questionable conclusions.

More specifically, in a cultural context, I'm interested in why
people believe UFOs exist at this point in history, and why they
are piloted by ETs. As good enough reason as any, after all
people study a whole range of strange and borderline phenomena
out of the same curiosity, from ghosts to ESP and abominable
snowmen without being questioned about their ulterior motives.

It seems that when one tries to study UFOlogy and one inevitably
has to interact with its proponents, it becomes apparent after a
short while that one is not allowed to approach the subject in
an objective way but is forced to take sides and argue a
position - because there is so much emotion and belief invested
in the subject by so many.

The reasons why this should be the case are worthy of study in
themselves - and indeed there a few sociologists and folklorists
who have made attempts at studying motivations and belief
systems held by UFOlogists.

It's a minefield for reasons that have become more and more
apparent to me after dipping in and out of this List for the
past 2 years. In hindsight I think I could have better invested
my time in pure research than slugging it out in endlessly
circular arguments which lead precisely nowhere.

What you seem to be saying that in the world of Corporate
Ufology no one is entitled have an interest in this subject
unless you buy the line being "sold" by the choir on UFO
UpDates.

It reminds me of what one UFO 'buff' (and there is no other word
to describe him) said to me, eyes wide open in horror when I
told him I'd been studying UFO reports for years but didn't
'believe' in ET visitations - "How can you be interested in UFOs
and not believe in aliens?"

Quite.

No wonder anyone with a questioning mind gave up on this stale
and hermetically-sealed debate in exasperation a long time
ago.......

See you in another 50 years

Dave Clarke

"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe in _something_; in
the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied
with bad ones."  --   Bertrand Russell.













   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 16:25:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 00:02:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>>

<snip>

 >As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >List whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >pathetic.

 >Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >so, years after his death.

He played fast an loose with the data. He modified the
information in sighting reports to fit his CEHs (Candidate
Explanatory Hypotheses). Had he been honest about reporting in
his book I would have no problem. His failure to be honest is
what is pathetic.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                          Secrecy News -- 05/02/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 14:23:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 00:04:15 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/02/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 2, 2001

**CIA COVERT ACTION IN ITALY
**INTELLIGENCE AND THE OPEN SOURCE CHALLENGE
**FISA ACTIVITY REACHES ALL TIME HIGH


CIA COVERT ACTION IN ITALY

Covert action involving clandestine U.S. government support of
Italian democratic parties during the 1960s was documented for
the first time in the latest volume of the State Department's
Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series, released
on April 21.

The covert action program was predicated on the idea that with
sufficient financial support, "the democratic parties' appeal in
the next national election should increase and that of the
Communist Party should decrease," according to a 1965 National
Security Council document.

The newly disclosed documents on the covert action in Italy are
available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/advisory/state/italy.html

The complete FRUS volume in which the documents appeared (FRUS,
1964-1968, vol. XII, Western Europe) is posted here:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xii/

The covert action in Italy is one of a rather small number of
U.S. covert actions that have now been officially acknowledged.
But these are only a fraction of the number that were actually
carried out during the cold war.  There were no fewer than 163
covert actions approved during the Kennedy administration alone,
according to the State Department, and 142 covert actions during
the Johnson administration through February 1967.

See the "Note on U.S. Covert Action Programs" prepared by the
FRUS editors here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/advisory/state/covert.html

Characteristically, the CIA resisted declassification of the
records on covert action in Italy.  Approval of their release
had to be sought from the so-called High-Level Panel, composed
of representatives from State, CIA and NSC.  This was the first
issue ever brought before the High-Level Panel (in 1998) and it
authorized disclosure of the newly published records.  In a
regrettable concession to CIA budget secrecy policy, however,
the dollar figures associated with the Italy operation were
excised.

In a sign that dissatisfaction with CIA disclosure policy is
spreading beyond the community of historians and advocates, the
CIA's reluctance to declassify old records was blasted in an
opinion column that appeared last week in the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram.

"Pardon the American people for caring, but foreign affairs
isn't some abstract thing that impacts only uptight men in
expensive suits who work inside the Beltway," wrote
Star-Telegram editorial writer J.R. Labbe.

"[DCI George J.] Tenet and his minions in the spook world appear
to be arguing that this material should remain secret forever.
`Forever.' That's a long time and is unjustifiable under the
Constitution, a document that they themselves swore to protect,"
Labbe wrote.

There is of course no specific constitutional requirement to
declassify historical records.  But the CIA is in direct
violation of the U.S. Constitution when it withholds historical
budget information since there is a specific constitutional
requirement to publish an account of all expenditures "from time
to time."  The CIA's casual defiance of this provision
diminishes the power of the Constitution and is genuinely
subversive of American democracy.

See "CIA must stop sitting on historical briefings " by J.R.
Labbe in the April 26 Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

http://www.star-telegram.com/columnist/labbe2.htm


INTELLIGENCE AND THE OPEN SOURCE CHALLENGE

The U.S. intelligence community is belatedly recognizing that it
has failed to fully exploit the availability of open source
intelligence and that remedial steps to correct this problem
should be "a top priority for investment."

"Today, open source material of relevance to [intelligence]
analysts working in a dispersed threat environment is dauntingly
voluminous, and the Intelligence Community is not keeping up
with it," according to the "Strategic Investment Plan for
Intelligence Community Analysis" produced by the National
Intelligence Production Board (NIPB) and published this week by
the CIA.

"Open source" here refers generally to intelligence-related
information that is not classified or otherwise subject to
official access controls.  As a result it may be collected
without resort to espionage.

"The NIPB has made the development of an Intelligence Community
strategy for open source a top priority for investment and
concerted action over the next few years," the Plan states.  The
Community "also needs to exploit the Internet and other open
media more effectively and efficiently."

This represents something of an about-face for U.S.
intelligence, which in recent years has considered open sources
to be somebody else's problem.

When George Tenet was asked at his confirmation hearing in 1997
about the role of open source intelligence, he indicated that it
was not a priority. "We are an espionage organization," he said
dismissively.  Even at that time, critics said he was confusing
means (espionage) with ends (intelligence).

"I don't want to be in the position where we lead people to
believe that we are going to be the open source repository for
the entire government, or pay to develop that kind of a
capability," Mr. Tenet told Congress.  "I don't think it's our
mission."

Given DCI Tenet's negative outlook, it is no surprise that "the
Intelligence Community investment in open source... has declined
radically in recent years," according to the new Strategic Plan,
even as the utility of open source intelligence was growing by
leaps and bounds.

Under the new Plan, it appears that intelligence agencies will
now endeavor to make up for lost time, beginning this year with
development of "a Community-wide strategy for exploiting open
source material."

The Strategic Investment Plan for Intelligence Community
Analysis is available on the CIA web site or here (a 3 MB PDF
file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/UnclasSIP.pdf


FISA ACTIVITY REACHES ALL TIME HIGH

The secretive Court established by the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 was busier than ever last year,
approving an all time high of 1012 government applications for
electronic surveillance or physical search of suspected foreign
intelligence agents in the United States.

The Justice Department disclosed the contents of its calendar
year 2000 annual report to Congress today in response to a
request under the Freedom of Information Act.  The report was
filed on April 27.

The FISA Court has been controversial because, with one
exception, it has never rejected a government application for
surveillance, raising questions about the quality of the Court's
review.  Justice Department officials say that the high approval
rate simply reflects their rigorous preparation of the
application prior to submission to the Court.  They say that
defective applications, like that in the Wen Ho Lee case, are
turned back before they ever reach the Court.

A separate problem arises due to the fact that, unlike ordinary
criminal cases involving law enforcement wiretaps, no defendant
in a FISA-based prosecution has ever been able to view the
application for surveillance and to meaningfully challenge its
legality.  In the absence of adversarial review, courts depend
exclusively on the prosecution's version of events.

The government submitted a record 1005 requests for surveillance
or physical search in calendar year 2000.  Of those, 1003 were
approved before the end of the year.  (The remaining two were
approved in January 2001.)  Nine requests submitted in 1999 were
also approved in 2000, for a grand total of 1012 approved in
2000.  (The previous high was 880 authorizations granted in
1999.)  One request was modified but none was denied.

The latest FISA report to Congress is not yet available online.
But several previous annual reports are posted here:

http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/readingrooms/oipr_records.htm

******************************
To subscribe to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org>
with this command in the body of the message: subscribe
secrecy_news [your email address]

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email:  saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

             Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 13:03:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 00:06:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 20:20:27 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:19:11 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>My apologies to any on this list who want to have nothing to do
 >>with New Age topics, UFOs excepted. However, we really can't
 >>discuss abductee experiences seriously unless we acknowledge
 >>possible reality of paranormal phenomena that accompany them,
 >>and these include New Age topics. Some fraction of UFO
 >>abductions are seen to be OBEs,

 ><snip>

 >>Here is the short bibliography. For more, see my website file
 >>below.

 >Don't forget Ray Fowler's

 >'The Watchers II : Exploring UFOs and the Near-Death Experience'

 >which... well, the title says it all.

I don't have that book, but have his earlier 'The Watchers',
which I now see discusses Betty Andreasson's UFO-related OBE
experiences, and shows connections with NDEs. And he also goes
into the "angels=aliens" connection plus biblical events that
are best explained as UFO events. This latter topic is in quite
a few other UFO related books also.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

             Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 05:28:36 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:22:07 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:14:05 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 02:40:17 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >>I was asking for some index of UFO Interest/Awareness/Belief or
 >>what-have-you, quite apart from numbers of actual sightings!

 >>It was my hope to compare and contrast public interest in UFOs
 >>with the sightings statistics; which I already have. I was also
 >>hoping (alas) to get some consistent numbers indicating public
 >>interest, going back to 1940 or so.

 >>So far, the best suggestions have been public opinion polls
 >>(Roper, Gallup) about _belief_ in UFOs; not a bad start in
 >>itself, but even these leave large gaps! Furthermore, these are
 >>mostly restricted to the USA, aside from some French polls
 >>mentioned by Gildas.

 >Hi Larry,

 >You ought to check out Robert Durant's piece on "Public Opinion
 >Polls on UFOs" from Evans and Stacy's UFO 1947-97 (John Brown
 >Publishing, London, 1997).

 >This is an excellent summary of polls from 1947, 1950, 1966, the
 >70s etc up to the 90s by a variety of polling organisations.
 >Mostly USA but interesting.


Hello Dave:

Good idea, and will do. I have a copy within arm's reach the
entire book is a good read BTW. Its those large gaps that stop
me however. It would appear that there was no consistent annual
bellwether of public UFO interest or opinion. Polls are
attracted to the hot issues of the day, and if UFOs aren't much
discussed, there is no poll for a given year.

Hmmm. maybe the mere absence of any UFO poll is itself a good
indicator!

Best

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                 Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:33:46 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:24:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall


 >From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
 >Subject: Forward: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >PRG Paradigm Research Group

 >[Forward of Press
 >Released received by PRG.]

 >PRESS RELEASE - April 26, 2001

 >THE DISCLOSURE PROJECT

 >For Immediate Release

 >MILITARY,  AGENCY WITNESSES TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY ON
 >EXTRATERRESTRIAL PRESENCE; CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS SOUGHT

 >Washington, DC - On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military,
 >intelligence, government, c orporate and scientific witnesses
 >will come forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC
 >to establish the reality of UFOs as extraterrestrial vehicles,
 >the presence of advanced extraterrestrial life forms, and
 >sequestered advanced energy and propulsion technologies.  The
 >weight of this firsthand testimony, along with supporting
 >government documentation and other evidence, will establish
 >without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to
 >Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Proje ct, which
 >is hosting the event.

<snip>

 >Disclosure Project Contact: Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302
 >Media Relations: Janet Donovan 202-822-9318



Stephen,

And if you believe that megalomaniac Greer, I have a bridge in
Brooklyn to offer for sale to CSETI at a real bargain.

After you and he set back serious, scientific UFO research
another decade in the U.S., we will try our best to sweep up
after you, but with constantly increasing cynicism about the
intelligence and motives, not to mention the sincerity, of the
radical operatives at work here.


Richard Hall









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                           The Watchdog - 02-05-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 18:24:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:27:37 -0400
Subject: The Watchdog - 02-05-01


UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"
http://www.ufowatchdog.com


***NEWS***
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/news.html

~ More On Alleged Roswell Debris
~ Night Time Sighting In Scartaglin
~ CE-2 Reported In Spain
~ UFO Disclosure
~ NIDS: Triangle Reports Close to US Air Bases
~ More On Alleged Jordanian Meteorite
~ UFOs In Bogota, Columbia
~ British UFOlogy Mourns Loss of Investigator

***OF INTEREST***

HEY! SPEAK UP!! Your thoughts, views and comments wanted - How
do you view the current state of Ufology? Send comments to:
ufowatchdog@earthlink.net

~Ad *First Annual Northwest UFO/Paranormal Conference* Ad~
http://www.seattleartbellchatclub.com/NWUFO.html
UFOWATCHDOG.COM will be covering this conference...

***BY POPULAR DEMAND***

UFO Dirtbag of the Month for May 2001 - Because you demanded it!
Jonathan Reed, Robert Raith and the Reed Hoax. Look for updated
section soon!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                         Re: Roswell Piece - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 16:59:33 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:29:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Piece - Tonnies


 >From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
 >Subject: Roswell Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >In one of the videos, Dr. Leir explains that the >piece becomes
 >too hot to handle when placed in hot water and too cold to
 >handle when placed in ice water. I'm afraid this testimony does
 >more harm than good. It certainly is not what any scientist
 >would consider as objective experimental evidence and tends to
 >support the notion by mainstream science that ufologists are not
 >credible.

Another claim made on Whitley Strieber's website is that close
photographs of the object could not be taken because the object
somehow "blurred" the film. This is more nonsense. If you look
on his site now, you see microscope photos of it. So much for
blurring.

This rock doesn't match any materials related by witnesses and
has no chain of custody whatsoever. I really wish this
"shocking" Internet expose wouldn't happen.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                                 More Occam

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:07:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:32:19 -0400
Subject: More Occam


My post on Occam may have been a lot to digest, especially for
people who don't know physics. I'll try to simplify.

I quoted an FAQ on Occam's Razor from a physics website. Most of
it talked about the misuse of the principle.

The principle itself was formulated, supposedly, by a Franciscan
friar in the 14th century. It's been translated from Latin
(already there are problems knowing which formulation is
authentic), and then reinterpreted and reworded more times,
probably, than anyone can count.

Maybe that's the first thing to understand. It's not a law of
nature, not something you can state once and for all in any
authoritative form. It's a rule of thumb, in effect handed down
from scientist to scientist.

In physics, says the FAQ, "we use the razor to cut away
metaphysical concepts." This requires a little interpretation.
"Metaphysical," as used here by a physicist, doesn't refer to
religious or occult metaphysics. The writer isn't interested in
ghosts, the afterlife, any notion of a supreme being.
"Metaphysical," here, is a philosophical concept, which means
undetectable. One strong view in the philosophy of science (and
in philosophy generally) is that anything that can't be detected
or verified is a metaphysical concept, and doesn't belong in
either science or philosophy.

And note the example the writer gives! This isn't some kind of
paranormal dispute, but instead one of the most famous
revolutions in the history of physics. It's Einstein's theory of
special relativity, which allowed physicists to dispense with
the notion of an invisible, undetectable "ether" which somehow
filled all space. This notion was common in the 19th and early
20th century -- for instance, the speed of light was supposedly
something that could be measured against a motionless ether.

But this motion proved to be undetectable. In fact, the speed of
light appeared to be the same no matter where you were where you
measured it, even if you were moving. This forced the revision
of many ideas in physics, and two famous physicists, Einstein
and Lorenz, came up with theories to describe what was going on.
Lorenz's theory required the undetectable ether; Einstein's
didn't. Thus, says the writer of this FAQ, Einstein's theory was
better, according to Occam's Razor, because it didn't force you
to imagine the existence of something that could never be
detected. Logically speaking, the ether wasn't a necessary
hypothesis, because various unexpected experimental observations
could be explained without it.

The writer of the FAQ, however, then goes on to say:

"But uncertainty and the non-existence of the ether can not be
deduced from Occam's Razor alone. It can separate two theories
which make the same predictions but does not rule out other
theories which might make a different prediction. Empirical
evidence is also required and Occam himself argued for
empiricism, not against it."

In other words, you can't just look at two theories, and pick
the one that requires the fewest assumptions. You need empirical
data, otherwise known as facts. The theories have to fit the
facts, before you can begin to apply Occam's Razor to them. In
the Einstein case, the two theories both did fit the facts. Both
did a logical, rigorous job of explaining a lot of factual data.
So there was some point in applying Occam. There was no
speculation going on -- just two theories, both solidly grounded
in the facts.

But then, says the FAQ, comes an extension of Occam, when his
principle is expanded to become something called the "Law of
Parsimony" -- the idea that the correct theory is likely to be
the simplest one. In ufology, that would supposedly be the
theory that didn't require us to suppose that aliens were here.
It's simpler to assume that people are just misperceiving normal
things, since we know that this can occur. To decide that aliens
are here is an extra assumption, which we shouldn't need to
make.

The FAQ says this has nothing to do with Occam. It also says
that these principles of simplicity can be misleading:

"The principle of simplicity works as a heuristic rule-of-thumb
but some people quote it as if it is an axiom of physics. It is
not. It can work well in philosophy or particle physics, but
less often so in cosmology or psychology, where things usually
turn out to be more complicated than you ever expected. Perhaps
a quote from Shakespeare would be more appropriate than Occam's
razor: 'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than
are dreamt of in your philosophy.'."

In other words, some areas of life are very complicated, and
simple explanations may not work. The FAQ spends quite a lot of
time on this notion. For instance:

"Simplicity is subjective and the universe does not always have
the same ideas about simplicity as we do."

Or:

"The final word falls to Einstein, himself a master of the
quotable one liner. He warned, 'Everything should be made as
simple as possible, but not simpler.'"

And, right before quoting Einstein, the FAQ very clearly warns
against misusing this "law of parsimony," another term for the
notion that the simplest theory -- or the one requiring the
fewest assumptions -- has to be the best:

"The law of parsimony is no substitute for insight, logic and
the scientific method. It should never be relied upon to make or
defend a conclusion."

Let me quote that last part again:

"It should never be relied upon to make or defend a conclusion."

This is exactly what Dave Clarke has been doing. He thinks he's
using Occam's Razor. According to what's in this FAQ, he's not
-- he's using the expansion of it which is called the Law of
Parsimony. And he's using it wrongly, to defend a conclusion.

Let me make this concrete. Dave and I have been talking about
the Chiles-Whitted sighting, in which two pilots said they saw a
craft with windows pass by their plane. Skeptics note that
perception can be wrong, and that the pilots might just as well
have seen a meteor. I certainly agree that they might have.
Dave, however, thinks that Occam's Razor _requires_ us to
conclude that they saw a meteor, or at least to prefer that
theory. This is because we know that meteors exist, but we don't
know that unknown craft with windows are flying around.

Occam, according to what this FAQ tells us, would be useful if
we had more data. Suppose we knew for a fact that a meteor had
been visible from the pilots' cabin. In other words, we'd know
beyond any doubt that a meteor was seen that night, that it was
seen at the time the pilots said they saw the craft, and that it
was seen in the part of the sky the pilots would have been
facing.

Then we could compare two theories to explain the pilots'
sighting. One theory says they  saw a meteor. That, clearly,
fits the facts -- there was a meteor at that time, and we know
that people often misinterpret what they see.

Another theory says they saw an alien craft. That might also fit
the facts -- because, after all, the pilots reported seeing
something that sounds like an aircraft of some unknown sort. And
there's no logical reason why they couldn't have seen an alien
craft at the same time a meteor was sighted. Maybe, in this
version of the story, they say they'd actually changed course at
the moment the meteor supposedly appeared, so they wouldn't have
been able to see it.

According to Occam, however, we prefer the meteor theory,
because the alien theory forces us to make an additional
assumption -- that there are unknown craft flying around. These
craft might really exist, but this sighting doesn't prove it,
because the meteor explanation fits the facts.

This, however, is not how this sighting was. Nobody has
identified any unquestionable meteor that the pilots might have
seen. Thus, the meteor theory is pure speculation. There aren't
any facts for it to fit, other than that the pilots saw a bright
light shoot by, and that their description of it doesn't have to
be accurate, because witnesses are often wrong. The alien theory
is also speculation. There aren't any facts for it to fit, other
than that the pilots saw a bright light they said was a craft
with windows, and that their description could well be accurate,
because witnesses are often right.

There's no way to decide between these theories. Occam doesn't
apply. The theory of parsimony is misleading, because it takes
us away from facts and data. It makes life and science simpler
than they really are. It rules out the alien explanation, simply
because someone subjectively prefers the other one. But it
doesn't tell us that the alien explanation is less likely. We
may believe that for all sorts of reasons -- but they have
nothing to do with Occam's Razor.


Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                          Re: Roswell Piece - Carr

From: Scott C. Carr <sardonica@erols.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:13:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:34:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Piece - Carr


 >From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
 >Subject: Roswell Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >In one of the videos, Dr. Leir explains that the piece becomes
 >too hot to handle when placed in hot water and too cold to
 >handle when placed in ice water.


Dear List,

I had the fortune to have been able to examine this enigmatic
piece during my own recent visit to Roswell. In addition to Dr.
Leir's findings, I would like to add that the piece was much too
opaque to see through when held up to a bright light. And was
much too hard to shrug off when I attempted to knock myself on
the head with it.

Oh, and I should also add that the piece had the uncanny ability
to render itself with a strange generic quality when placed
under scrutiny - at times it actually appeared to disguise itself
as a common rock.

But, no need to pay good $$$ to attend this "online UFO
conference" - I've got plenty more "pieces" just like that one
right here in my back yard in Pine Bush, that I'd be happy to
sell you for 1/2 the conference fee!


Sincerely,

-Scott C. Carr
Editor, The Flying Saucer Gazette
www.erols.com/sardoncia








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 19:38:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:37:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Lehmberg


 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 11:32:17 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger  <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >You wrote:

 >>As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >>with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >>list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >>something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >>pathetic.

 >Why should that bother you?

 >And re the word - pathetic - there you go with the buzz words
 >again Dave. I notice debunkers just can't help it. Once someone
 >begins to question your motives or your reasoning you start with
 >the buzz words. Bile and venom-wow.

 >>Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >>certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >>so, years after his death. Food for thought!

 >A brilliant scientist, spouting nonesense - an knew it. More food
 >for thought.

 >Best,

 >Don Ledger


The culinary critics on the List must find the presentation,
character, and 'taste[ of your gastronomic fare more nourishing,
palatable, and realistic than that of Mr. Clarke who serves up a
day old Big Mac at best, and at worst, well... a steaming bowl
of any traditional British dish comes to mind <g>. But that's
understandable given that his five piece band in the sixties
hoovered pond water, too. <g>.  ...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com  <glad all over!>

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                    Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:56:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:39:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:34:30 -0000


 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >>with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >>list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >>something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >>pathetic.

 >>Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >>certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >>so, years after his death.

 >>Food for thought!


 >Dave,

 >As someone who knew and interacted with Menzel (he once gave me
 >a flying saucer tie!), you seem to be somewhat unaware of his
 >history of utterly unscientific behavior in regard to UFOs. Here
 >was a man, nominally a scientist, who acted as anything but.
 >Yet, he was profoundly influential in waving other scientists
 >and important people off of the UFO subject because Harvard
 >Observatory was attached to his name. He richly deserves to be a
 >"villain" from the perspective of those of us who take UFO
 >reports seriousl.

<snip>

Hello all.

Who is more crazy? The fool or the one who follows him?

If one relies on somebody else to think in his place, I guess
he's only a moron.

Menzel probably only represented the opinions of his fellow
scientists regarding UFOs. I bet he would have lost his
reputation and credibility if he had expressed different views.

He who speaks can have influence only if one is willing to
listen and is receptive to his ideas.

Regards,










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

              Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

From: Diane Harrison - AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:44:00 +1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:42:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 14:51:22 +1000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
 >Subject: Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?


Oops, sorry Folks

I made a slight boo-boo in my report I meant SETI not Ceti
silly me.



Regards Diane Harrison

National Director of The Australian UFO Research Network
Australian Skywatch Director

~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
THE AUSTRALIAN UFO RESEARCH NETWORK
(A Non-Profit Organization)

E-Mail: tkbnetw@powerup.com.au
E-mail: ufologist@powerup.com.au
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw

ADMINISTRATION:

PO Box 805
Springwood  Qld  4127
Australia
~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
Australian UFO Research Network Hotline Number
          1800 77 22 88 Freecall
~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>~~~~<>
Disclaimer: A.UFO.R.N 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                       Re: Serious Research - EagleBoy

From: Ron EagleBoy <eagle100@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:56:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:47:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - EagleBoy


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 01:27:52 +0100


 >Regarding:

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000


 >Some time ago, I posted the following to the 'UFO Skeptics'
 >forum:

 >Richard Hall has highlighted the existence of his article, 'The
 >Science of UFOs: Fact vs. Skepticism', on the 'International
 >Space Sciences Organization' web site, at:

 >http://www.isso.org/inbox/science.htm

 >Hall cites a number of well known 'UFO' cases which are
 >purported to be consummate evidence of alien visitations - the
 >usual fare.


James,

In the Zamora case, you believe that the object he saw was
actually a hot air balloon manned by two pilots, or balloonists.
My question to you is, what was the size of that hot air balloon
and how does it correlate to the size of the object that Zamora
saw? If the balloon was the size of, say, a mid-sized
automobile, would it's capacity be efficient enough to lift a
gondola with two men aboard?  Also, how could this H.A.B. burn
the ground and lift off at the same time? It would have to have
it's burner pointed at the ground to burn the foliage as it
lifted off? Your balloon version doesn't make sense.

BTW, there were two witnesses, a father and his daughter, who
had stopped and talked to Zamora shortly after the incident.
Zamora told them the story and took them to where the incident
happened. I believe it was the father who filmed the site This
film distinctly shows the burnt, smoldering foliage, along with
the landing strut marks in the soil. So we have visual evidence
to support Zamora's claim of burnt foliage and landing marks. I
think a more logical version, regardless of who or what the
occupants were, was that the object was:

1. Too small to be a functional hot air balloon.

2. The object "initially" lifted off using some kind of rocket
thrusters, leaving evidence of this.

Also, if this had been a H.A.B., isn't it likely that the
balloonists would have already come forward by now? After all,
the Socorro case is well known. Over a number years, it's been
in many documentaries, commercial and otherwise. It's also been
shown on Sightings, Unsolved mysteries, and many similar shows,
countless times.

Concerning your explanation of the Cash - Landrum case.....

I can only assume that this particular diamond shaped hot air
balloon got it's burner instructions backwards too, because
according to your version, they also pointed their burner
towards the ground and somehow miraculously got their balloon to
rise.

But you forgot to mention that this must have been one of
those brand new fancy hot air balloons that are fitted with a
"radioactive" burner!

Had to have been because both Cash and Landrum suffered from
severe radioactive burns. But guess what? So did that part of
the road where the incident happened.

In fact, that stretch of contaminated roadway must have really
worried the hell out of somebody because a crew with unmarked
trucks and equipment came and removed that contaminated part of
the road, along with the trees that lined it.

But, the first job must not have been good enough because they
came a second time and removed the same section of roadway all
over again, but this time they dug down about a foot deeper to
make sure they left no traces of any radioactivity. But to top
it all off, digging up the contaminated road was not enough. The
government repeatedly tried to buy Betty's scorched-up,
(radioactive?) car!


Sincerely,

Ron EagleBoy










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 23:06:44 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:07:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 16:47:45 -0400

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +0100

 >>As for only the British being subject to the influence of the
 >>tabloid Press version of UFOlogy - who are you kidding? How
 >>about the National Enquirer - weren't they offering a prize for
 >>the best UFO yarn shortly before Travis Walton was 'abducted' ?

 >>Of course, that sort of media hype couldn't happen back home,
 >>only to the Brits!

 >Please read my post again. As I wrote, the Enquirer used to run
 >UFO stories, but that was years ago. It no longer does. None of
 >the American print tabloids do, except the Weekly World News,
 >which flagrantly makes everything up. There is very little - if
 >any - print coverage of current UFO reports anywhere in the US
 >tabloid press.

 >I also noted, you'll remember, that there was plenty of media
 >hype in the US about UFOs from the 50s through the 70s. But no
 >longer - at least if we're talking about print media and
 >non-tabloid TV.

There is at least one place where the tabloids have indeed
influenced ufology: Carl Sagan's most frequently cited source of
UFO 'information' for his many strange comments about UFOs in
his last book 'Demon Haunted World' is 'Weekly World News'!

As a true scoffer, he didn't even reference 'UFOs: A Scientific
Debate' published by Cornell University Press (he was based at
Cornell). He was co-editor!

He also doesn't mention the House of Representatives 'Symposium
on UFOs'. He was a contributor as were 11 others, all
scientists, including Hynek, Menzel, Harder, myself, etc.

Repeat after me: "What the public doesn't know, the scoffer
won't tell them" and "Don't bother me with the facts, my mind
is made up."

I discussed Carl's comments in detail in TOP SECRET/MAJIC which
is still available from me, if not in most bookstores.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                        Re: Roswell Piece - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 23:25:03 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:09:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Piece - Friedman


 >From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
 >Subject: Roswell Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Greetings List:

 >As many of you know, ufoxfiles.com is touting physical evidence
 >of the 1947 flying saucer crash in Roswell, NM. Details are to
 >be released in a forthcoming Internet webcast on May 12th.
 >However, photos and videos of the alleged "Roswell Piece" are
 >currently on the ufoxfiles website for viewing.

 >I have to admit that I am a bit taken aback with the
 >sensationalist approach surrounding the disclosure of this
 >event. Furthermore, as I read the information and watch the
 >videos regarding the alleged evidence, it appears to me that the
 >"Roswell Piece" may be nothing more than a polished piece of
 >meteorite. The results of scientific tests will need to go much
 >further than simply reporting an isotope analysis.

 >In one of the videos, Dr. Leir explains that the piece becomes
 >too hot to handle when placed in hot water and too cold to
 >handle when placed in ice water. I'm afraid this testimony does
 >more harm than good. It certainly is not what any scientist
 >would consider as objective experimental evidence and tends to
 >support the notion by mainstream science that ufologists are not
 >credible.

 >Should the so-called "Roswell Piece" end up having a more
 >prosaic explanation than debris from an alien-manufactured
 >extraterrestrial craft, the UFO skeptics will likely use this
 >event as evidence for how gullible UFO believers can be.

 >Therefore, I urge caution in accepting the conclusions drawn by
 >ufoxfiles until all evidence and alternatives are considered.


I fully agree with Tim Haley that caution is advised in
accepting any of the hype about the conference.

One reason I agreed to accept the invitation to appear was to
try to make sure that no claims are made that cannot be backed
up by detailed laboratory data.

I can say that the material is definitely not a meteorite, nor
is it silca sand as one article claimed. It is silicon which of
course is a very important industrial material., here on earth.

Tests are ongoing.

Whether there is any connection with Roswell is, of course,
another important consideration.

I anticipate a lively program, to say the least.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 22:45:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:11:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

<snip>

 >it is worth noting that Menzel once
 >tried to get Blue Book to purchase the services of a consulting
 >group to take over its UFO work. Menzel somehow neglected to
 >mention that he had a considerable financial stake in the
 >organization - the sort of scam that has caused not a few to
 >end up facing federal charges and serving time

Huh? What exactly was his role in this, vis a vis the Air Force?
Was _he_ making the decision on behalf of the Air Force, or was
he just promoting a little business? Or is this an issue because
his business would have been in competition with Hynek?

 >The Air Force found out about Menzel's gross conflict of
 >interest only accidentally. Menzel was personally,
 >intellectually, _and_ financially corrupt

Offhand, sounds like business as usual in the consulting
business. Any more details?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                         Re: Roswell Piece - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 15:46:41 +1200
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:43:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Piece - Sawers


 >From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
 >Subject: Roswell Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Should the so-called "Roswell Piece" end up having a more
 >prosaic explanation than debris from an alien-manufactured
 >extraterrestrial craft, the UFO skeptics will likely use this
 >event as evidence for how gullible UFO believers can be.

 >Therefore, I urge caution in accepting the conclusions drawn by
 >ufoxfiles until all evidence and alternatives are considered.


Yes! I understand where you're coming from Tim. As much as I'd
like to think of this 'Roswell Piece' as being the 'real thing!'
I do feel the $$ value of this exercise a little suspect.

Unable to afford the US $$ involved in getting the 'first hand
knowledge' of this event, I await with baited breath for the
skeptic vs. believers debate that will ultimatly follow this
disclosure.


William








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Furlotte

From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:10:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:58:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Furlotte


 >From: Thiago L. Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 08:11:55 -0300 (BRT)
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?

 >Well I spoke with Rodrigo and he told me that is emerging a
 >theory that the bodies found in the UFO crash site belonged to
 >americans children (orphans)that they used in experimental
 >aircrafts to see what happened in their organism.

 >That story drove me surprised. Someone had heard about it?



Thiago,

I strongly suggest we nip this little piece in the bud right
now. The concept that any "civilized" scientist would willingly
use children in experimental aircraft is ludicrous to say the
least and downright macabre.

 From a purely cold logical viewpoint one only has to think a
little to see how totally ridiculous the concept is.

1.  Children would provide no valuable data because they are not
the ones that would be flying the aircraft to begin with.

2.  Through the natural occurrence of aircraft crashing there
already exists enough "bodies" to determine exactly what happens
to the human body in the event of catastrophic trauma.

3.  The Roswell Crash took place in 1947 or 2 years after the
worst world war in history.  the 6 years of war that took place
from 1939 to 1945 had already given us enough corpses (including
children) to examine what happened to bodies and the internal
organs therein.

I do trust I've given enough "reasons" why children, (orphans or
otherwise) would not be used in experimental procedures
resulting in death.


Dave (Furry) Furlotte










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:01:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:10:01 EDT
 >>Subject: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Go ahead and see if you can find prosaic explanations for any of
 >the 18 or 20 cases. That would be a definite contribution.
 >However, if nothing else a debate on these cases would at least
 >help to make overt the assumptions, logic, and reasoning that a
 >skeptibunker (I like that term) and a UFO advocate use to argue
 >their respective positions. I think that is worthwhile in
 >itself, and don't really expect we will change each others (or
 >anyone else's) minds.


Dick,

Probably not, but it might be worth the effort, anyway. But, I
thought we were discussing your hypothesis, as you restated
below,

 >My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in this
 >article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or identical
 >to the cases illustrated in this article, are what make the ETH
 >the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the present debate,
 >I am willing to base my argument on these 18 cases.

I began the examination of your 18 cases,

 >>In 1997 a group of nine scientists took part in a panel which
 >>reviewed evidence put forward by a group of UFOlogists. This
 >>became known as the Pocantico Workshop or "Sturrock
 >>Workshop", after the moderator, Peter Sturrock. A report,
 >>"PhysicalEvidence Related to UFO Reports" was published in
 >>the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, p. 170, and can
 >>be found, with supporting information, at the magazine's site,

 >>http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/
 >>sturrock/toc.html

 >>Among the cases presented to the panel were [two] on your
 >>list:

<snip>

 >>#5) 10/18/73 Mansfield, Ohio, helicopter incident.

<snip>

 >>#17 23/27/80, Huffman, Texas, Cash-Landrum incident.

 >>The conclusions of the Sturrock Panel stated,

 >>"It was clear that at least a few reported incidents might have
 >>involved rare but significant phenomena such as electrical
 >>activity high above thunderstorms (e.g., sprites) or rare cases
 >>of radar ducting. On the other hand, the review panel was not
 >>convinced that any of the evidence involved currently unknown
 >>physical processes or pointed to the involvement of an
 >>extraterrestrial intelligence."

 >Which of course, without actually applying these "explanations"
 >to specific cases, you would prefer to believe.

The point isn't what I would prefer to believe, but that these
nine scientists, handpicked by Peter Sturrock and including no
known UFO skeptics, concluded that these two cases provided no
evidence which would support your hypothesis.

 >>In an article on June 29, 1998 at ABC News.com, panel member Tom
 >>Holzer, a physicist with the National Center for Atmospheric
 >>Research, said the study stopped well short of making any
 >>conclusions that Earth is being visited by extraterrestrial
 >>craft. "You can never rule anything out, but we didn't see
 >>any evidence for that", he said.

 >Naturally. You can't prove anything with a handful of cases.
 >Right?

But Dick, these are two of _your_ handful of cases.

 >Also, you ought to take a look at Bernard Haisch's web
 >site that someone posted on this list a while back:
 >www.ufoskeptic.org Haisch is a professional astronomer of
 >considerable experience who established this site out of concern
 >that scientists are too readily and glibly discarding UFO
 >reports without proper study.

Haisch's website provides a link to the Sturrock Panel report,
without any comment. This suggests to me that he must be
endorsing it.

He has a section on your #5, the Coyne helicopter case, but
refers to Jennie Zeidman's 1979 work, which was presented to the
Sturrock panel and is included as one of the supporting
documents. He includes a narrative of the incident taken from
chapter 9 of "UFOs and the National Security State: An
Unclassified History. Vol. 1: 1947-1973" by Richard Dolan.

This Dolan narrative rejects Klass's meteor explanation and
investigation blithely by simply quoting Jerry Clark, "Philip
Klass said the crew misidentified a meteor or fireball, and
suggested the ground witnesses were lying. Jerome Clark
dismissed Klass's theory as "fantastic," since none of the
testimony was even remotely consistent with it."

None of the testimony was even "remotely consistent" with a
meteor? A red light, later bright green, changing to red as it
disappeared? The whole thing lasting seconds (according to early
interviews?), or less than a minute, according to the pilot on
national TV? None of this even remotely resembles a meteor?

Dolan, and Haisch, never mention the experiment conducted by
pilot Coyne on a later flight, at the request of Klass, which
showed that the aircraft lost radio contact when it flew low in
the same location. All of this dismissed just because Jerry
Clark thinks none of it even remotely resembles a meteor? This
website's treatment of the Coyne incident can't be taken
seriously.

So, to restate my question in my previous post, has any new
evidence for the Coyne and Cash-Landrum cases surfaced since
this 1997 Sturrock Panel study, which concluded (see above) that
these two cases, as well as the others presented, did not
represent evidence for the ETH?

If not, I propose we move on to another on your list:

#12, the April 17, 1966 police chase from Ravenna, Ohio to
Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

The witness, officer Dale Spaur, described the brilliant UFO as
disappearing in the morning sky as the Sun rose after the long
chase. Many commentators have viewed this last object as very
likely the Planet Venus. One view is that the genuine UFO was
present during the early part of the incident, but that Venus
was seen, and chased, later.

One could observe that none of us were there, but the witness
was. If the witness misidentified Venus after chasing the object
for nearly two hours, what would make one thing that the
witnesses didn't recognize exactly what they had been chasing
for two hours?

In short, Venus seems to me to be the probable explanation for
the incident.

To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

             Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:17:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:03:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Deardorff


 >From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:52:26 +0100
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 09:19:11 -0700
 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 ><snip>

 >>Presumably it is one's psychic awareness, often called the
 >>spirit or soul, that is communicated with in this. For more
 >>general information on this, I would recommend reading about
 >>verified past-life recalls.

 >>Now I find I must apologize also to those associated with an
 >>organized religion that does not accept the concept of
 >>reincarnation, for raising this subject. However, Christianity
 >>at least accepts the concept of the human spirit, and these
 >>studies tell a lot more about it. The research findings of Ian
 >>Stevenson are particularly illuminating on this. Past-life
 >>recalls are obviously related to NDEs and OBEs, since some of
 >>the latter involve memories of the between-life state and these
 >>mesh well with descriptions of NDE memories.

 >There have also been studies of cases where there is an overlap
 >between the life of the deceased person and and that of the
 >person doing the "recalling".  Obviously, in such circumstances
 >"reincarnation" in its classic sense cannot have occurred -
 >since both people were alive concurrently prior to the recall
 >(although they did not know each other).

I'm not aware of such cases, David. Can you send me a reference?
In Ian Stevenson's 1500 or so solved pastlife cases, this hasn't
occurred, though once or twice there was an uncertainty of a few
months due to uncertain birth date (Indian cases, I think they
were).

 >Some of these cases seem to involve an actual "personailty
 >switch", whereby the personality of the dead person overrides
 >that of the "recipient" on a sporadic or even permanent basis.

That's usually called "possession." The New Testament Gospels
have a lot of that.

 >This may indicate that memories have some form of independent
 >existence, and that some powerful mechanism exists for
 >"injecting" those memories into the minds of unwilling
 >recipients.

I'm only aware of the walk-in hypothesis, where some soul who's
grown weary of living, yet the body is still OK, agrees to let
another soul take over.

 >Pushing the hypothetical boat out a little further...

 >As classic "past life recall" cases suggest that "independent
 >memories" can be transferred irrespective of the passage of
 >time, there is no reason to believe that these memories could
 >_only_ come from the past.  Furthermore, as many "past life"
 >cases seem to involve the recollection of traumatic events - any
 >such memories that arrive from "the future" could also be biased
 >towards the traumatic.

It's hard to verify those future-life memories. :-) But I guess
that a true prophet is supposed to be able to "recall" them, in
which case they call it prophecy.

 >This leads to the hypothesis that the "alien abduction
 >experience" could be one of "preincarnation" - and that the
 >traumatic memories are those from a time when humans *are* being
 >used as guinea pigs in horrendous experiments by uncaring ETs.

Most all the traumatic past-life memories I've read about
involve the mode of death of the subject in one or more past
lives, which didn't involve alien abductions. However, there are
quite a few examples in the literature where the subject's past
life was lived as an alien visiting Earth.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:05:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:59:51 -0400

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:55:52 EDT
 >>Subject: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >You've demonstrated my point. Coyne said he operated the controls
 >one way. Klass posits (and you do, too) that this couldn't have
 >been true, no matter what Coyne said.

You are demonstrating my point: you don't actually read what
Uncle Phil or I have written. He said that since Coyne was an
experienced, well-trained pilot, he probably forgot. The fact
was, he didn't crash, the chopper rose up in altitude and they
were all saved from certain death. And Coyne was at the controls
when all of this happened. Well, maybe to co-pilot did it and
Coyne was right, but then the co-pilot would have forgotten
becasue he said he wasn't flying it.

Why is it that you have to believe so desperately that an [can't
say "ET", here] "something unkown" was in control?

And, while we're not on "ET", could provide a short list of the
possible things that could have happened?

<snip>

 >What you and Klass have done is reject Coyne's testimony because
 >it isn't convenient to you. Which is not to say that you and
 >Phil couldn't be right. But your certainty isn't warranted. How
 >can you totally rule out the possibility of anything unknown?

Did I? If I did that I must have been mistaken, or bleary-eyed or
something. Tain't so.

 >And your sarcasm has no place on this list.

On this List? You're kidding. I apologize if you are offended by
my rantings.

 >Especially when you're so wrong about Sheaffer.

 >>You have this exactlyl backwards, Greg. Shaeffer noted that
 >>Betty did claim to see two lights in the sky, just where Jupiter
 >>and Saturn were. It's just that she concluded one was a saucer.
 >>Another famous example of eyewitness testimony being good enough
 >>to turn an exciting saucer tale into just one more boring IFO.

 >Betty Hill said she saw two bright lights in the sky, which
 >later she identified as the alleged UFO and Jupiter. She drew a
 >picture to show where they were . One of the lights in her
 >picture is where Jupiter was. The other one is not where Saturn
 >was.

 >Robert theorizes that the two lights were Jupiter and Saturn.
 >He's made a drawing to show what he thinks she saw. The lights
 >aren't in the same positions that they occupy in her drawing.

 >When I asked Robert about the discrepancy, he agreed with me. For
 >his theory to work, he said, Betty Hill can't have accurately
 >reported what she saw. Which is not to say that he's necessarily
 >wrong. Maybe his theory is correct. But he had to change the
 >sighting report to make it work.

Where was Saturn in her report?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                     Re: UFO Polls & Surveys - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 13:48:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:11:58 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Polls & Surveys - Bourdais


 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 03:58:52 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO Polls & Surveys

 >>From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 12:09:23 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 01:51:21 -0700
 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >>>Can anyone suggest a cheap-and-dirty measure or gauge of "Public
 >>>Interest in UFOs" (PIU)? (public awareness?)

 >>Well, I recently made a little inventory of public opinion
 >>polls, both in the United States and in France, for my speech at
 >>the last cinference in San Marino (Italy), the theme of which
 >>was on Ufos and the Media.

 >>I have gathered the main results on a Excel grid, which I am ready to
 >>send as attached file if it is readable (can someone confirm that ?)
 >>Here is a little excerpt of it, to give an idea.

 ><snip>

 >Hello Gildas:

 >Much appreciated! I cannot read Excel files. There should be
 >some way to convert the data to Plain Text (ASCII code) as in
 >this email.

Hello Larry,

I would prefer to send you a paper copy by mail of the Excel
grid if you give me a mailing address. I would then send you a
complete copy of my study, with other interessing aspects.

For the list, I am sending this reply with the Excel grid as
attached file.

[Which is only readable by PCs or MACs with PC 'emulators' -
  not forwarded to List - please e-mail Gildas, privately --ebk]

 >A lot depends on the wording of the polls and the gaps present a
 >terrible problem of course.

I am aware of that difficulty, and I tried to retain only comparable
questions in my study.


Gildas









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                  Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:15:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:13:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Young


 >Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 20:43:46 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:37:10 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>For example, the first known appearance of the story that the
 >>Army threw a cordon around the site was Frank Edwards in 1955 or
 >>56 in one of his popular saucer lectures. He said people could
 >>find this info in old newspaper clippings. No one has ever found
 >>such a newspaper report. The implication is clear: Edwards made
 >>it up.

 >>If one assumes that these are real events, then there had to be
 >>a chronology from event to story. But if the story is only that,
 >>well, who knows?

 >I couldn't find anything like that without a place name or
 >approx. date. There was nothing similar in three books by
 >Edwards, and attributes searches for (Landing and Military) led
 >nowhere.

 >Can you (Bob) recall any other details to help track this one
 >down?

Hi, Larry:

See my posting last year about Frank Edward's role in apparently
generating several key parts of the "Roswell" tale:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/dec/m30-014.shtml


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:39:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:17:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young


 >Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 05:34:32 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:55:16 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hey, I think we have actually found one human on this planet who
 >has never seen a UFO! It seems Bob, that even in your childhood
 >you were highly trained as an observer of the skies!

Roy, List:

I think that the Gallup Poll, some years ago, got a response of
about 11 percent for the number of adult Americans who said that
they had seen a UFO, themselves.

That puts me with the other 89 percent people.

Just not an early adopter, I guess.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:50:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:21:30 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

      UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 6, Number 18
May 3, 2001
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

THREE ALIENS APPEAR IN ANGOL, CHILE

Three aliens, humanoid in appearance and two meters (6 feet, 6
inches tall) appeared to a group of five people in the roadside
park of Las Pinas, overlooking the city of Angol, Chile, in
March 2001.

The aliens, "two meters tall and with red lights on their
hands, were seen March 16 by five people from Concepcion, at the
Las Pinas scenic overlook," located one kilometer (0.6 miles)
southeast of Angol, "a place which has become a favorite for
extraterrestrial visitors."

"Witnesses to the latest sighting of three strange entities
were seen by five residents of the town on Concepcion, who had
come to Angol to see the sights."

"'They saw three beings standing nearly two meters tall hiding
behind some vegetation. The beings appeared to talk amongst
themselves, turned around and disappeared," said Ernesto
Escobar, head of the field research team"

"Escobar said that the witnesses made drawings of what they had
seen and that samples were taken of soil upon which the figures
had allegedly been standing."

"'I cannot tell you what they were. I don't know if they were
ghosts or extraterrestrials, but we're investigating and making
videos,' he added."

"These events have been a source of fear and expectation in the
community, causing Angol residents to remain on the lookout."

"In fact, they acknowledge that it is a well-known fact that
strange events have transpired at the scenic lookout and that
people were increasingly visiting the spot in the hopes of
seeing something weird."

"'I've never seen anything, but everyone's going there to check
it out and they are watching to see if the entities will appear.
It's said that half-human creatures were seen, and that's the
reason for the investigation,' said resident Luis Novoa."

"Julia Espinoza, who also lives in the region, stated, that she
is aware of people who have seen strange phenomena at Las
Pinas."

"'Everything happens at a gate with two decorative metal wheels
and that's where the entities appear. Before this, the place was
quite tranquil, but now everyone's talking about it. Even I
went to the lookout after the apparitions occurred.'" (See the
Chilean newspaper Diario Austral de Temuco for April 22, 2001,
"Shock in Angol over UFO sightings." Muchas graciasa Scott
Corrales, autor de los libros, Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y
Forbidden Mexico, y tambien Rodrigo Cuadra para eso articulo de
diario.)

THREE UFOs FLY OVER BOGOTA, COLOMBIA

On Sunday, April 22, 2001, "at 4:15 p.m., three objects of
unknown origin were seen flying over Bogota," the capital of the
South American nation of Colombia.

The overflight of the three UFOs "was witnessed by more than
3,000 People," said William Chavez, spokesman for the Contacto
OVNI (Spanish acronym for UFO--J.T.), a Colombian research
group.

"The object was in the vicinity of Cerro El Cable (hill) and
Monserrate, where they remained motionless (in the sky) for four
minutes."

"Radio Difusora Nacional (RDF) and Tudelar phoned Contacto OVNI
a research organization to discuss the sighting live," Chavez
reported. "And because in recent weeks this type of phenomena
has become increasingly common over Bogota."

Chavez stated that, in March 2001, "a mothership was captured
on video over the barrio Santa Isabel (neighborhood) When the
video arrived (at Contacto OVNI, it was easy to see that the
object was a large tubular object at an altitude of 3,000 meters
(9,900 feet)." he reported.

"Cerro El Cable has been the site of many UFO sightings," he
added, "On (Sunday) April 15, 2001, Pablo Berrio filmed a
disc-shaped object in the vicinity of El Dorado International
Airport in Bogota, and we are investigating this sighting."
(Muchas gracias a William Chavez of Contacto OVNI, y tambien
Louise A. Lowry para esa informacion.)

MEN IN BLACK TERRORIZE WITNESSES IN CALAMA

The ongoing Chupacabra drama in Calama, a city in northern
Chile, took an ominous new twist last week with an appearance by
the Men In Black (MIB).

"A resident who saw the alleged Chupacabra was visited and
intimidated by odd-looking characters not once but twice,
according to Centro UFO de Calama researcher Jaime Ferrer, who
conducted field researches of the phenomenon from" March 25
through March 28, 2001.

"The witness and his wife were warned not to speak to Ferrer,
whose footsteps are being closely followed by these enigmatic
individuals."

"The threatened residents are friends of a third witness to the
continuing manifestations and who served as an important source
of information.'" to Ferrer.

"Ferrer himself had the following to say: 'On Wednesday night
(March 28, 2001) I returned to continue my interview, but my
witness behaved oddly and steadfastly refused to talk to me. I
didn't know what was going on. I managed to convince him after
awhile, and he explained the reason for his attitude."

"The resident, a humble farmer, told him that at 8 o'clock that
morning, 'his friend turned up in a truck along with his wife,
children, worldly possessions, and the following story.'"

"'Listen, compradito, (Spanish for little friend--J.T.) last
night (Tuesday, March 27, 2001) at 11:30 p.m., the three men
from the last time turned up at my house . They told us a bunch
of stuff. My wife heard it all, and we are in a heap of trouble.
Something very bad is going on, and we have to be careful. They
mentioned the name of one Jaime Ferrer, the guy who researches
and makes plaster casts of things and they said it (Jaime's
investigation--J.T.) will lead nowhere. They said you are
giving him information about them. I don't know what's going on
here, but I'm leaving and I can't stay any longer.'"

"Ferrer said that he had 'in fact discovered and copied several
(Chupacabra) prints the previous day.'"

"That evening, myself and others who were with me clearly heard
the long, braying sound of the Chupacabra--no other animal can
contain such a sound for over 40 seconds."

"Far from being intimidated by the MIBs, Ferrer said he will
continue to pursue his research." (See the Chilean newspaper La
Estrella del Loa for April 26, 2001, "Chupacabra researcher in
the crosshairs of the Men In Black." Muchas gracias a Scott
Corrales y Jaime Ferrer para eso articulo de diario.)

GIANT SAUCER HOVERS OVER A TOWN IN DERBYSHIRE, UK

"The mystery of the UFO sightings over the Peaks and Dales" of
Derbyshire, UK "shows no signs of abating after the 23rd
reported sighting in the last 8 months."

"Since September (2000), locals have spoken of strange lights,
flying saucers and huge triangular craft in the skies. One was
even caught on video."

"Now, a 34-year-old Wirksworth man, who asked not to be named,
says he saw a giant disc-shaped craft over Idridgebay around a
month ago." "The stallholder was driving to market in Derby at
3 a.m. when he saw the UFO hovering over the road."

"And he was the first person to have seen a UFO who has
admitted to being afraid of what he saw."

"'It did frighten me because I couldn't explain what it was,'
he remarked, 'I've never seen anything like this before and
logic couldn't explain it.'"

"'It was shocking. I've never been a believer in UFOs and
sightings, but I believe in them now.'"

"The man said the craft was hovering above woods and seemed to
rotate. It had blue, red and white lights."

"Last Wednesday (April 18, 2001) there was a sighting of three
silver discs over Youlgrave," Derbyshire, UK. (See the newspaper
Matlock Mercury for April 25, 2001, "23rd UFO over the Dales."
Many thanks to Gerry Lovell for this newspaper article.)

UFOs SPOTTED OVER COUNTY KERRY, IRELAND

"The mystery in the skies above Kerry deepened this week with
reports of yet another strange occurrence."

The sighting was in the Scartaglin area of Kerry.

"On this occasion, the man who witnessed something very
peculiar admitted to (the Irish newspaper) The Kerryman that he
was utterly terrified. by his eerie experience and was glad to
be surrounded by the familiar lights of his home village."

"It all started in the early hours of a Friday morning two
weeks ago , after the incident at The Spa reported in last
week's edition of The Kerryman the man, who stressed that he
not be named, had been a Pioneer for over 25 years, was walking
towards a friend's house."

""I had been at home with my wife and children, but after
everyone went to bed, I decided that I would call over and visit
a friend of mine who lives in the village,' the witness, who
did not want to give his name, explained."

"'Anyway, I was heading towards his house when suddenly I saw
something that I can only describe as a a huge ball of light ,
perhaps about a mile away in the distance, somewhere in the
direction of Ballydesmond.'"

"'I would have guessed that it was no more than 40 or 50 feet
(12 or 15 meters) off the ground."

"'The way I would describe it is that the edges looked as if
they were sizzling. They weren't smooth or constant.'"

The first thing that entered the witness's mind "was that he
had seen a helicopter until he realized that it was far too
large and entirely the wrong shape."

"Also, on what was an extremely still, clear night, there was
not a sound to be heard from the object, whatever it was."

"'All of a sudden, it dimmed down quite slowly but what was
even weirder was that , as it moved off, there were blue, green
and yellow lights at its rear, rotating and flashing in
sequence. I watched it until it disappeared from view and then
went to my sister's house and told her what I'd just seen.'"

"'To be honest, I don't know what it was. I'm a pretty logical
guy and I don't really believe in UFOs, but the fact is that it
wasn't a plane or anything like that. It was something strange
and like nothing I'd ever seen before. I certainly can't begin
to describe what it was.'"

According to The Kerryman, "a taxi driver and his two
passengers also reported seeing something unusual in the sky
that night" near Scartaglin. (See the Irish newspaper The
Kerryman for April 25, 2001. Many thanks to Louise A. Lowry for
this newspaper article.)

VERY LARGE UFO SEEN BY A FAMILY IN JESI, ITALY

On Friday, April 20, 2001, at 11 p.m., "eyewitnesses saw a
strange object of immense size from their home in Jesi, in the
province of Ancora," in Italy. "The object was of a definite
shape and moved slowly towards the sea. It appeared to pass near
Falconara. The object proceeded slowly and was observed with
binoculars. The object was of circular form and presented
multicolored lights around the rim." (Grazie a Alfredo Lissoni e
Vladimiro Biboletti di Centro Ufologico Nazionale D'Italia per
questo rapporto.)

COUPLE SIGHTS A UFO IN BRUNEI

A Chinese couple sighted a hovering UFO in the Southeast Asian
country of Brunei last week.

"A husband and wife claim to have seen an unusual flying object
in Gadong," in the Rabu district at around 12:30 a.m. on
Thursday, April 26, 2001.

"They were on their way home from a dinner in Jerudong."

"Philip Chua, 33, a businessman, claimed that he had earlier
seen a UFO around the grounds at Jalan Tungku Link. He was
shocked by the bright object in the skies."

"Coincidentally, he had a camera with him. However, the object
vanished as if it knew that someone was taking a picture of it."

"'At first I was disappointed that I didn't have a chance to
take a picture. Later, I was asking myself if it really was a
UFO or just a light from a lamp.'"

"His wife, Sylvia Goh Meiling, 28, corroborated her husband's
story."

"Upon passing a bridge near Emperor's Court, she claimed that
they saw the object appear again over Rimba, Gadong."

"Chua immediately stopped the car and took pictures of it. Then
it vanished. The husband and wife kept on waiting for ten
minutes" But they were "left disappointed" when the UFO did not
return.

"The next day (Friday, May 27, 2001) Chua took the film to his
friend's shop in Tutong. Strangely, while his friend was
developing the film, the shop's power was cut off for one
hour."

"However, Chua felt relief when the object's image appeared in
the photos."

Brunei "authorities confirmed that radar had not detected any
objects in the nation's airspace other than planes," i.e.
commercial air traffic flying assigned routes. (See Media
Permata for April 28, 2001. Many thanks to Gerry Lovell for
forwarding this report.)

FAST FLYBY IN ILLINOIS

On Tuesday, April 24, 2001, Cliff C. was outside his home in
Oswego, Illinois when he "saw an object appear from the east and
dart away suddenly to the north. The orb of light was hovering
over a church when it stopped. It was white, but it had a kind
of red aura around it. I'd say it was going 100 miles per hour
(160 kilometers per hour)." (Email Form Report)

CYLINDER-SHAPED UFO SEEN IN SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA

On Wednesday, April 25, 2001, the male witness was outdoors in
Sebastian, Florida when he saw the UFO approaching from the
northeast.

"It was a big cylinder-shaped object with something like a
sphere on the front," he reported, "If I were to guess, that is
where they control the ship from. I know that what I saw was
something really odd and not a UFO but it looked like one to me,
for sure."

"It was a silvery black cylinder with a sphere on the front. It
was way up there, maybe 30,000 feet (9,900 meters) and it moved
slow at the beginning but then began to move extremely quick"
before departing to the southwest. (Email Form Report)

A NEW "GREAT PYRAMID" IS DISCOVERED...IN PERU!

Archaeologists unleashed a bombshell last week, announcing the
discovery of a giant pyramid in Peru--in an ancient city dating
back to 2627 B.C.

"That discovery, based on research by Chicago-area scientists
and reported Friday in the research journal Science, indicates
that complex societies emerged in the Americas earlier than
previously thought."

"'This isn't something just a little earlier than the other
known early urban cultures in this hemisphere--it's a lot
earlier,' said Field Museum anthropologist Jonathan Hass, who
has been excavating the site with his wife, Northern Illinois
University anthropologist Winifred Creamer, and a Peruvian
colleague since 1999. 'Something of this size doesn't occur
anywhere else for another 1,000 years.'"

"'This may actually be the birthplace of civilization in the
Americas,' Creamer said."

"The site, in a remote desert area along the Rio Supe (river)
was first discovered and recorded by archaeologists in 1905 but
lay ignored and unexamined for decades. It is near Caral, a
farming village which to this day has no electricity or running
water."

"The most startling artifacts at Caral, one of the 18 large
sites in the area, are the huge stepped pyramid structures."

(Editor's Note: Similar to the ziqqurats found in Iraq and the
Mayan pyramids of Mexico and Guatemala.)

"The largest, dubbed "Piramide Mayor" measures 500 feet (150
meters) on two sides and 450 feet (120 meters) on the other two
sides. It rises 60 feet (18 meters) with a flat top that city
builders covered with rooms, chambers, stairways, halls, altars
and hearths for ceremonial activities."

"The largest pyramid and five others are arrand a vast circular
plaza 1,800 feet (540 meters) in diameter."

"The pyramids were built by filling woven reed sacks with river
pebbles and piling them up, said Hass., then increasing the
piles in trimmed, flat-faced rock."

"After adding a coat of plaster, the builders painted the
pyramid in earth tones 'Rosy pink. light beige, light gray,
blue-gray and yellow,' said Hass, 'These things would have been
magnificent in their glory.'"

"Researchers used radiocarbon dating of fibers from the sacks
to establish that the pyramid construction took place as early
as 2627 B.C."

(See the Chicago Tribune for April 27, 2001, "Pyramids in Peru
as old as in Egypt," page 3.)

(Editor's Comment: Score one for you, Colonel James Churchward.
"Pyramids as old as Egypt" have been found in Peru, exactly
where you predicted in your book, The Children of Mu, written
70 years ago.)

READER FEEDBACK:

A VOLKSWAGEN IN 1938?

New Zealand ufologist Norman Weiss writes, "Just a comment on
the spontaneous combustion story. On April 7, 1938, the
Volkswagen was top secret and none knew of it except Hitler and
the engineers working on the project. They weren't commercially
available until the late 1940s."

"So it would have been impossible for young William Ten Bruik
to have been driving one when he spontaneously combusted."

(Editor's Comment: Good point, Norm. Vincent H. Gaddis got this
account from a Sunday newspaper feature story. It could be that
the New Jersey newspaper guessed--wrongly--that Ten Bruik had
been driving a Volkswagen. Maybe one of our Netherlands readers
can help us out on this one.)


 From the UFO Files...

1934: POST TIME

The Kentucky Derby is coming up this weekend, which reminds me
of a strange little story my grandmother once told me.

It was November 1989, and the news had just broken about the
UFO landing at Voronezh in Russia. I mentioned it when I visited
my 90-year-old grandmother in Taunton, Massachusetts. She asked
me if I really believed in Flying saucers, so I told her about
my sighting in Seekonk, Mass. and mentioned a few other Fortean
phenomena. When I finished, she was quiet for a moment and
said, "You know, something strange like that happened to me
once."

My grandmother was born Ruth Sutcliffe in Fall River, Mass. in
1899. Yes, that's the same Fall River where Lizzie Borden took
an axe and became the defendant in "the Trial of the Century."
The Nineteenth Century, that is.

(Editor's Note Here's an odd fact. In addition to being
acquitted of their respective murder charges, O.J. Simpson and
Lizzie Borden have something else in common. They both have
their father's first name for a middle name. That's Orenthal
James Simpson and Lizzie Andrew Borden.)

Anyway, in 1922, Ruth married Joseph O'Hearne and moved to
Taunton, where they had four daughters. They owned and operated
a combination cafe and bar on Church Street.

Now, May of 1934 was the pits of the Great Depression. My
grandparents had managed to limp through the winter, but now
they were in trouble The building's furnace had gone down in
March, and they needed to replace it, as well as pay liquor
license fees and other bills, before the cold weather set in
again.

Then my grandad heard that a man in Nashua, New Hampshire had a
furnace to sell. My grandparents decided to drive up north for
the day to see if the old farmer was willing to do business.

The night before their trip, with the family financial woes
weighing heavily on her mind, my grandmother fell asleep. And
she had a strange, vivid, realistic dream.

She dreamed she was walking slowly between a pair of white
stables on a sunny spring day. Just then, a groom led a
thoroughbred racehorse into her field of view. He left the
horse alone for a moment. The horse was a handsome roan
thoroughbred about sixteen hands high with two white stockings.

He was wearing a royal blue blanket with a gold border. In the
lower right corner of the blanket was a bright gold number 9.

The horse looked her way, and my grandmother woke up.

What an odd little dream, she thought.

The following day was a warm sunny New England day as they
drove up to Nashua. But the trip was in vain. The farmer had
already sold the furnace. They started home. But instead of
turning south towards Lowell, Mass., my grandfather headed east.

"Joe!" she said, "Where are you going?"

My grandfather shrugged. "It's a nice day. I thought we'd drive
over to Rockingham. You know, have a hot dog, see a race, so the
trip ain't a complete waste."

A half-hour later, they arrived at the racetrack in Rockingham,
N.H., just in time for lunch. Heading for the refreshment stand,
my grandmother experienced a weird feeling of deja vu. And then
she recognized those white stables--the same stables she had
seen in her dream.

Before she could comment to my grandfather, a groom led a
thoroughbred roan right in front of them--a roan with two white
stockings wearing a royal blue blanket with a gold border. It
was the exact same horse--but with one difference. There was no
gold number 9 on the blanket.

Just as in her dream the previous night, the groom walked away
for a moment, and the horse looked right at her. My grandmother
stopped, and when the groom returned, she asked, "Excuse me, is
this horse running today?"

"Yes, he is, ma'am."

"What's his name?"

"Troubadour," the groom replied.

Naturally, my grandfather wanted to know why she was so
interested in this horse. So she told him about her dream.
Grandad was a complete skeptic who chalked it up to
coincidence. He scoffed at my grandmother's assertion that
Troubadour would win his race.

Listening nearby was this Fellow we'll call Harry. Gram
described Harry as "a typical racetrack tout," wearing "a
porkpie hat, a loud sports jacket and tie, and white socks." He
also "had little slips of paper sticking out of his pockets."

Harry came over and joined the discussion. Then he reached into
his sports jacket and took out his well-marked copy of The Daily
Racing Form. And--whattaya know--Troubadour was the ninth horse
in the ninth race.

Well, that was enough of a portent for Harry. He made a beeline
to the cashier's window.

Grandad, however, proved harder to convince. For one thing,
Troubadour had never won a race before. The odds were a
hundred-to-one against him winning today.

"Ruth, you can't be serious. We're down to our last five
dollars. You want me to bet it on a dream!?"

"Troubadour is going to win. I just know it."

"We need this money. We don't have enough gas to make it home.
We're going to run out somewhere around Stoughton (Mass.) and
then we'll have to walk the rest of the way."

"Oh, Joe, just go in there and place that bet...before it's too
late."

So, with my grandmother looking over his shoulder, he went in
and placed the bet. He mumbled, "Put it on Troubadour--to win."

The cashier looked surprised. "Are you sure you want to make
this bet, fella?"

Grandad almost backed out at the last second. My grandmother
gave him a look, and he said, "Yeah, go ahead."

As they reached the stands, the trumpet sounded for the ninth
race. The horses, with their jockeys aboard, entered the gate.
Tense minutes passed. And the electric bell clanged.

Troubadour was off to a slow start, trailing the pack to the
first turn. You could see why he wasn't considered competition
for Man O'War, War Admiral or Seabiscuit. At the half, he was
running on the outside of the pack, well behind the favorites,
Moonglow and Sexton Ferry.

My grandfather let out a groan. "I knew it! This is a sucker's
bet if ever I saw one."

But then something strange began to happen. Troubador suddenly
caught fire, galloping ahead of the pack. Coming around the
clubhouse turn, he had caught up with Sexton Ferry and was only
two lengths behind Moonglow. And on into the stretch. One length
behind Moonglow. A half-length. And now it's Troubadour and
Moonglow racing for the finish line Troubador and Moonglow,
neck and neck. And the winner is...Troubadour, by half a neck.

"Impossible!" my skeptic grandfather said, covering his eyes.
"I don't believe it!"

"We won!" my grandmother shouted, hugging him.

So they collected their winnings. It didn't make them
independently wealthy, bit it enabled them to buy a brand-new
furnace for the cafe and to settle their debts and to pay the
mortgage for the rest of 1934. There was even enough left over
to buy new school clothes in September for their four girls,
including my mother, age seven.

Then they saw Harry come out, hugging a big black leather
valise. He had a ile-wide grin and danced into the parking lot.

"Depression!?" he yelled, then let out a burst of insanely
joyous laughter. "What Depression!?"

And why was Harry so jubilant? Well, you see, my grandparents
bet five dollars on Troubadour to win.

Harry bet fifty.

Seeing my grandmother, he ambled over, fished in a side pocket
and handed her his card. "Lady, if you get any more of them
dreams, give me a call."

I'd like to think that, after this experience, Harry gave up
gambling and became a missionary in Cambodia. But I suspect that
he journeyed instead unto Hialeah--by way of Belmont and
Pimlico.

"I believe it was the only win of Troubadour's career," my
grandmother said.

And the only clairvoyant experience she had in her long life.

So what did happen at the Rockingham racetrack back in May of
1934?

Did my grandmother have a "wild talent" for precognition, which
manifested itself once and only once, during her family's moment
of dire need?

Or did the thoroughbred hear the voice of Anikin Skywalker in
his head, saying, "Use the Force, Troubadour."

Or, as I sometimes suspect, does the Almighty have a strange
sense of humor?

Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more
UFO and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to
you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2001 by Masinaigan Productions, all
rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup
provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name
and list the date of issue in which the item first appeared.


E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
or use the Sighting Report Form at:

http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences,
UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of
Filer's Files and Oz 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 09:56:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:23:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 22:45:24 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100


Bob,

 >>it is worth noting that Menzel once
 >>tried to get Blue Book to purchase the services of a consulting
 >>group to take over its UFO work. Menzel somehow neglected to
 >>mention that he had a considerable financial stake in the
 >>organization - the sort of scam that has caused not a few to
 >>end up facing federal charges and serving time

 >Huh? What exactly was his role in this, vis a vis the Air Force?
 >Was _he_ making the decision on behalf of the Air Force, or was
 >he just promoting a little business? Or is this an issue because
 >his business would have been in competition with Hynek?

What does Hynek have to do with this? I don't recall mentioning
his name in this discussion, and I'm confused about what his
name is doing here. The source for this story about Menzelian
underhandedness is a private memo by Ed Ruppelt. For details
about this episode and the larger context, see p. 635-36 of The
UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed.

 >>The Air Force found out about Menzel's gross conflict of
 >>interest only accidentally. Menzel was personally,
 >>intellectually, _and_ financially corrupt

 >Offhand, sounds like business as usual in the consulting
 >business. Any more details?

Obviously, Menzel had every right to suggest that an independent
organization be paid to take over Blue Book. By every business
ethic I have ever heard of, he also had an obligation to reveal
at the outset that he was not a disinterested observer when he
put forth the proposal. Suffice it to say Menzel's behavior did
not make a favorable impression among Blue Book and Air Force
personnel.

In any event, Menzel never would have gotten the job. Blue
Book's scientists as well as colleagues they consulted deemed
his contributions to UFO study little short of worthless. One
astronomer remarked that Menzel's UFO theories amounted to no
more than "a couple of meaningless high school physics
experiments," according to Ruppelt.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

              Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:14:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 12:42:10 -0400
Subject: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"


http://www.spiritdaily.com/UFOS2.htm

CHRISTIAN EXPERTS SAY UFO 'ABDUCTIONS' ARE HORROR OF FALLEN ANGELS

Christian experts on UFOs say surveys indicate that up to 8
million Americans have had bizarre experiences in which entities
purporting to be from outer space contacted, abducted, or
harassed them, at times in a way that brings to mind the fallen
angels of Genesis 6:1-4.

To many, this is fantasy. To others it's another sign of a
heightening spiritual war: as evil has increasingly manifested
in society, so have reports of revolting entities that often
appear to people in the middle of the night and in some cases
interact with victims physically - as also happened in the
passage from Genesis.

If there is any truth to such claims - and it is increasingly
looking like something is going on - this is an issue in demand
of urgent intercession.

While many may be imagining such events - and while some of the
accounts seem too fantastic - a good number have defied attempts
to discount them and remind us of the deceptions demons can
conjure - coming now as "extraterrestrials" as they once came
as gods, elves, and fairies.

There may be life on other planets, and for all we know, beings
from another planet may have and may still be visiting earth. We
have no idea. We know only that in the majority of such cases
there is a spiritual aspect - an evil feeling - and the fruit is
negative in the extreme.

One former victim, Guy Malone, has since formed a ministry in
Roswell, New Mexico - where one of the most famous "UFO"
incidents took place. "I was what people call an experiencer or
abductee, in the sense that I remembered from childhood the
stereotypical 'grays' [gray-colored entities] with big black
eyes," he told Spirit Daily. After his conversion he became
interested in spiritual warfare and recognized the larger UFO
problem - that he was hardly alone in his encounter with
"demonic" beings.

"The fruit of it is very obvious," says Malone, whose ministry
is called Alien Resistance. "Anybody who is a contactee or
abductee, all of their testimonies include stories where these
beings are telling them spiritual 'truths' - such as, 'you are
god' and 'we're spirit guides here to help mankind evolve into
utopia.' So simply, without even looking at the Bible for a
doctrinal position, the fruit points it out as deceiving
spirits, the doctrine of demons, as Timothy said to expect [2
Timothy:3:1-17]."

The phenomenon of abduction has been mentioned through history.
In modern times it dates to October 16, 1957, when a 23-year-old
Brazilian farmer named Antonio Villas Boas was taken by what
seemed like a "craft." That was ten years after the alleged
"crash" at Roswell. While many experiences seemed to involve
mechanical and not spiritual phenomena, we must always keep in
mind that evil spirits are fallen angels and that like angels
they can manifest physically. Boas claimed he was taken in a
small, cold room with seamless walls, where blood was extracted
from him and he was covered with a strange gel. After a while he
says a short "woman" with an "angular" face and "catlike" eyes
entered and had relations with him.

That was followed by the famous case of Barney and Betty Hill, a
New England couple who claimed to have been abducted in Exeter,
New Hampshire. Once more there were indications of strange
behavior that had to with reproduction. In this case it was like
a clinical procedure. I'll spare some of the details. Barney, a
postal worker, said he was terrified, feeling like a rabbit
before a predator. While most describe the "humanoids" as short
with gray skin and slanty eyes - similar to the images of
goddesses in ancient times - there were often bizarre twists
indicating that the entities could turn into various shapes and
forms. In the Hill case one of the beings looked like a "Nazi."

That was the 1960s - when so much evil germinated in our world.
Such cases skyrocketed during the 1970s and 1980s. In another
famous case - that of Travis Walton - "aliens" were described as
having "bulging, oversized craniums" - along with a leader who
seemed human.

This is bizarre, indecipherable stuff - as I said, much of it
may be the result of overactive imaginations. But it has
happened to too many people, and has even convinced
psychotherapists like Dr. John Mack of Harvard that something
unusual - perhaps not aliens, but something - is going on.

"Despite official skepticism and even cynicism in media,
government, and scientific circles, it must be evident to many
Americans that something extraordinary - at least from the
standpoint of the Western worldview-is going on," writes Dr.
Mack. "No conventional explanation for the thousands of reported
cases of encounters with alien beings has been sufficient, and
this remains true in spite of the fact that the experiencers
themselves would, with rare exceptions, welcome any explanation
other than that they are being visited without their permission
by humanoid creatures from another place. "

In the view of Guy Malone, the alien communications "are 180
degrees diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity. When
they talk to people they don't just disagree but diametrically
counter anything that has to do with the fundamentals of Jesus
being God in the flesh or the Son of God and the creation
account of man. They try to take us away from God. They claim to
be our creators."

In the U.S., accounts go back as far as ancient Indians who
spoke about interaction with "star people" and now Indian ritual
sites are often the sites for UFO encounters - including a New
Age center near Crestone, Colorado. Indeed, the New Hampshire
case occurred at a spot called Indian Hill.

What about Roswell, where it was claimed that there was physical
evidence of a physical (and not spiritual) craft?

We don't know. We don't know if Roswell merits credibility. And
once more, we don't dismiss the possibility of life on other
planets.

At the same time, however, there are always hoaxes, rumor, and
delusions - and if cases like Roswell are not imaginative, we
need to remember that spirits (as in the case of "angel hair"
and other debris found in association with UFOs) can cause
physical effects.

For years I have been receiving reports from people who have had
experiences with strange entities. I remember the horror of one
woman who called about "beings" that were haunting her young son
- alien-looking creatures that would gather around his bed with
their hands raised like a magic ritual. I also remember an
alleged seer in Georgia who claimed she had seen a craft land in
front of her yard near an apparition site with small entities
climbing out and trying to enter the land.

In my opinion, these people were not describing
extraterrestrials; they were describing spirits.

"I think the alien guise is one more way of tormenting mankind
or deceiving mankind into a non-biblical view of the world,"
says Malone. "All I remember is that there are several instances
in my childhood that were very scary in some instances in which
I was visited or taken by other beings. When I was 20 I owned up
to the fact."

Malone says there was some psychic activity in his family that
may have opened a "door" - and that such visits are often linked
not only to occultism and unrepentant sin.

"There's a 1996 Gallup Poll that says three percent of the
population and a Roper Poll suggests two percent," says Malone.
"It's in the more than one million, less than ten million range
of American who say they've had a close encounter or perhaps an
abduction and the number that believe in UFOs is through the
roof in compared to that."

Malone says there has been an increase since 1996 as spiritual
warfare has stepped up. It has paralleled interest in the New
Age. If there is any merit in such stories (and please remember
our disclaimers), they bring up the ugly specter of incubi and
succubi and also the idea from Genesis of fallen angels
physically interacting with earthlings. In Genesis is the
account of a time when "the sons of heaven saw how beautiful the
daughters of man were, and so they took for their wives as many
of them as they chose... At that time the Nephilim appeared on
earth (as well as later), after the sons of heaven had
intercourse with the daughters of man, who bore them sons."

Incredible as it sounds, Malone and others fear that evil
spirits are once more attempting to breed with humans. "Jesus
said as it was in the day of Noah, so shall it be at the coming
of the Son of Man," says Malone. "Some people believe the
specific purpose is to create a hybrid that looks perfectly
human that Satan can step into as the anti-Christ - that's what
a lot of people believe, that instead of being monsters or
giants or superhumans in their appearance, they're trying to
perfect it now where they can walk among us. I think that all of
the Greco-Roman mythology, the tales of a god mingled with a
woman and Hercules was born, or the Cyclops - I think all of
that has a historical basis in the angel phenomena that we are
now misinterpreting as extraterrestrial but has been with us and
is a very real thing. One age interprets it one way, our age
interprets it as extraterrestrial. There's a lot of evidence in
the Bible of hybrid races continuing. They're the ones that God
told to wipe out."

Malone believes nephilim are actually what we now know as
demons. "People who are experiencing this have been involved
with wicca and white magic or hardcore satanism," he points out.
"They've conjured demons and demons seek embodiment in humans."

To those with an apocalyptic bent, this may bear meaning since
the biblical passage is right before God purified mankind with
the Flood.

To others it's a call to arms. No matter how devils come, they
are defeated by Scripture. They are defeated by our angels -
especially Michael. They're defeated by Our Savior.

When asked if he is under demonic attack, Malone said that
before he opened up Alien Resistance and for the first time in
his adult life - since he was eight or ten years old - he had
two "encounters" and both times he stopped it cold by using the
name of Jesus.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                        Re: Roswell Piece - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 3 May 2001 08:16:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:01:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Piece - Hamilton


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Piece
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 23:25:03 -0300

 >>From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 03:22:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Roswell Piece
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Greetings List:

 >>As many of you know, ufoxfiles.com is touting physical evidence
 >>of the 1947 flying saucer crash in Roswell, NM. Details are to
 >>be released in a forthcoming Internet webcast on May 12th.
 >>However, photos and videos of the alleged "Roswell Piece" are
 >>currently on the ufoxfiles website for viewing.

 >>I have to admit that I am a bit taken aback with the
 >>sensationalist approach surrounding the disclosure of this
 >>event. Furthermore, as I read the information and watch the
 >>videos regarding the alleged evidence, it appears to me that the
 >>"Roswell Piece" may be nothing more than a polished piece of
 >>meteorite. The results of scientific tests will need to go much
 >>further than simply reporting an isotope analysis.

 >>In one of the videos, Dr. Leir explains that the piece becomes
 >>too hot to handle when placed in hot water and too cold to
 >>handle when placed in ice water. I'm afraid this testimony does
 >>more harm than good. It certainly is not what any scientist
 >>would consider as objective experimental evidence and tends to
 >>support the notion by mainstream science that ufologists are not
 >>credible.

 >>Should the so-called "Roswell Piece" end up having a more
 >>prosaic explanation than debris from an alien-manufactured
 >>extraterrestrial craft, the UFO skeptics will likely use this
 >>event as evidence for how gullible UFO believers can be.

 >>Therefore, I urge caution in accepting the conclusions drawn by
 >>ufoxfiles until all evidence and alternatives are considered.

 >I fully agree with Tim Haley that caution is advised in
 >accepting any of the hype about the conference.

 >One reason I agreed to accept the invitation to appear was to
 >try to make sure that no claims are made that cannot be backed
 >up by detailed laboratory data.

 >I can say that the material is definitely not a meteorite, nor
 >is it silca sand as one article claimed. It is silicon which of
 >course is a very important industrial material., here on earth.

Stanton,

Let me chime in here as I have had a little part associating
with some of the principals.

First, Dr. Roger Leir demonstrated his ice water test to me in a
restaurant and Tim is correct that such a test was far from a
scientific test. BTW, Roger does not even recall showing me
this. His memory is becoming a little faulty.

I presented him with a similar metal piece obtained from Dr.
Michael Wolf that Italian scientists touted as an
extraterrestrial specimen. When he dipped it in ice water it
quickly became cold to the touch. It had excellent thermal
conductivity. California-based Isonics produces an isotopically
pure silicon which has much better thermal conductivity than
natural silicon, meaning that heat can be removed more
effectively. tests have shown that isotopically pure silicon-28
has greater than 50% better thermal conductivity than natural
silicon. The wafers are grown as an epitaxial layer on a
standard silicon single-crystal wafer.

Of course, Time is correct. The amateur test did not even
include a thermometer or a control sample.

Now, here is the rub. I purchased a piece of silicon slag in a
store that looked identical to the Wolf piece and used Roger's
test and it had the same thermal properties as the Wolf piece
and the same as the alleged Roswell piece.

An independent lab in Canada confirmed that Wolf's piece was of
terrestrial manufacture and was extremely pure, maybe above .99
purity.

Dr. Russell VernonClark of San Diego University did the initial
testing of the alleged Roswell sample in 1997 and his report
shows unearthly isotopic ratios, however, later he withdrew his
report and migrated to another position in the university chain.
Later tests by others (I will ask permission to quote later if
requested) seem to reveal that this alleged Roswell sample shows
no evidence of being other than high grade manufactured silicon.
It will be interesting to find out if it is predominantly
silicon-28.

I may have more to report on this later, but there is a distinct
possibility that we will have to run more damage control on this
sensational new revelation.

My idea is that professionals on this List form an association
of Ufologists who either have some qualifications in the
scientific examination of evidence or can link with scientific
advisors who would be willing to volunteer their expertise. If
such an association can develop the protocols necessary for
evidence analysis and a definition of "qualified evidence", then
maybe funding can be raised to support this effort. I believe
that all the scientists and experienced researchers on this List
should have a chance to examine evidence such as this before it
is released in some sensational tabloid net convention so as to
bring a higher standard to UFO studies.


Sincerely,

Bill Hamilton
(In pursuit of raising my own standards)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                        Re: Serious Research - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:20:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:04:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:10:01 EDT
 >>>Subject: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>In an article on June 29, 1998 at ABC News.com, panel member Tom
 >>>Holzer, a physicist with the National Center for Atmospheric
 >>>Research, said the study stopped well short of making any
 >>>conclusions that Earth is being visited by extraterrestrial
 >>>craft. "You can never rule anything out, but we didn't see
 >>>any evidence for that", he said.

 >>Naturally. You can't prove anything with a handful of cases.
 >>Right?

 >But Dick, these are two of _your_ handful of cases.

 >>Also, you ought to take a look at Bernard Haisch's web
 >>site that someone posted on this list a while back:
 >>www.ufoskeptic.org Haisch is a professional astronomer of
 >>considerable experience who established this site out of concern
 >>that scientists are too readily and glibly discarding UFO
 >>reports without proper study.

 >Haisch's website provides a link to the Sturrock Panel report,
 >without any comment. This suggests to me that he must be
 >endorsing it.

 >He has a section on your #5, the Coyne helicopter case, but
 >refers to Jennie Zeidman's 1979 work, which was presented to the
 >Sturrock panel and is included as one of the supporting
 >documents. He includes a narrative of the incident taken from
 >chapter 9 of "UFOs and the National Security State: An
 >Unclassified History. Vol. 1: 1947-1973" by Richard Dolan.

 >This Dolan narrative rejects Klass's meteor explanation and
 >investigation blithely by simply quoting Jerry Clark, "Philip
 >Klass said the crew misidentified a meteor or fireball, and
 >suggested the ground witnesses were lying. Jerome Clark
 >dismissed Klass's theory as "fantastic," since none of the
 >testimony was even remotely consistent with it."

 >None of the testimony was even "remotely consistent" with a
 >meteor? A red light, later bright green, changing to red as it
 >disappeared? The whole thing lasting seconds (according to early
 >interviews?), or less than a minute, according to the pilot on
 >national TV? None of this even remotely resembles a meteor?

Obviously, Bob, you have never read Jennie Zeidman's meticulous
reconstruction of the case, an investigation, I might add, that
did not end in 1979 but continued for years. That anyone would
take Klass's absurd explanation (based on an investigation that,
at a most charitable interpretation, was incomplete and which
the crew rejected unanimously) is beyond me. But then I'm not a
pelicanist, so these mysteries will forever remain unexplained
to me.

In any event, the testimony is not, of course, "remotely
consistent" with a meteor. The incident did not take "seconds,"
as both air and ground witnesses testify and as the
reconstruction of the event Zeidman did with Coyne made clear.
To get a look at the not-remotely-consistent with a meteor
object that Coyne, his crew, and the ground witnesses saw, see
the sketch on p. 311 of Peter A. Sturrock's The UFO Enigma.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:36:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:06:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:56:05 -0400

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:34:30 -0000

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>As someone who knew and interacted with Menzel (he once gave me
 >>a flying saucer tie!), you seem to be somewhat unaware of his
 >>history of utterly unscientific behavior in regard to UFOs. Here
 >>was a man, nominally a scientist, who acted as anything but.
 >>Yet, he was profoundly influential in waving other scientists
 >>and important people off of the UFO subject because Harvard
 >>Observatory was attached to his name. He richly deserves to be a
 >>"villain" from the perspective of those of us who take UFO
 >>reports serious.

 >Menzel probably only represented the opinions of his fellow
 >scientists regarding UFOs. I bet he would have lost his
 >reputation and credibility if he had expressed different views.

I am certain that Dick is right, Serge wrong. Menzel was more a
shaper of views than a mouthpiece for them. At the time he was
an enormously powerful figure in American science, with all
sorts of professional and official connections, in a position to
make life difficult for scientists who took issue with him not
only on UFOs but on scientific matters generally (an aspect of
his personality interestingly discussed in Astronomy Now,
December 1992). Allen Hynek, who knew him for many years, often
(in private conversation) described Menzel as having the
personality of a bully.

If one scientist can be held responsible for causing science's
shameful neglect of the UFO phenomenon, it is Menzel. He abused
his authority, silenced nearly all dissent, and discouraged open
scientific inquiry and debate on an issue that should have been
of great interest to his colleagues. One consequence may be that
because of Menzel, UFOs remain as mysterious now as they were in
his day. You'd think that that alone, if nothing else, would
encourage modernday pelicanists to criticize him, but hey, I
haven't seen any camels passing through any eyes of needles
lately.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

              Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:39:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:07:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?


 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:44:00 +1000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Diane Harrison - AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
 >Subject: Re: Parkes Observatory In Oz Detects 'ET Signal'?

 >Oops, sorry Folks

 >I made a slight boo-boo in my report I meant SETI not Ceti
 >silly me.

Diane:

A whale of a mistake!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:56:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:11:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:59:51 -0400

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:55:52 EDT
 >>>Subject: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>You've demonstrated my point. Coyne said he operated the controls
 >>one way. Klass posits (and you do, too) that this couldn't have
 >>been true, no matter what Coyne said.

 >You are demonstrating my point: you don't actually read what
 >Uncle Phil or I have written. He said that since Coyne was an
 >experienced, well-trained pilot, he probably forgot. The fact
 >was, he didn't crash, the chopper rose up in altitude and they
 >were all saved from certain death. And Coyne was at the controls
 >when all of this happened. Well, maybe to co-pilot did it and
 >Coyne was right, but then the co-pilot would have forgotten
 >becasue he said he wasn't flying it.

As an Army helicopter pilot, I have always been bothered by the
excuses given for Coyne's behavior as postulated by Klass et.al.
This might be because I have found myself in circumstances in
which the aircraft didn't operate the way it was supposed to, I
compensated for it, but I didn't forget what I had done.

As a single example, while flying in formation, I was in the
sixth position in a double, heavy right formation. Think of two
"Vs" with an extra aircraft on the right side. The sixth
position meant that I was leading the second element, in the
slot so that there were aircraft directly in front of me, to the
sides, and to the rear. I was, you might say, trapped in that
position, with little room to maneuver. As we began a normal
descent, meaning dropping at 500 feet per minute, my aircraft
began to float, meaning that it was difficult to achieve that
rate of descent. Yes, there are things to be done. I pushed the
collective (which controls altitude) to the full down position,
but the aircraft continued to float. I kicked the pedals,
throwing the aircraft out of trim, which is supposed to increase
the rate of descent, but that didn't work. Remember, I couldn't
break out of the formation because I was surrounded by other
aircraft. I had to maintain my position or create a midair
collision. Finally, I rolled off the throttle, cutting some of
the power to the engine and we began to descend with the rest of
the flight.

The point here is that the aircraft shouldn't have been
floating, and that I was aware of what was going on and taking
steps to correct it. I wasn't so out of it that I couldn't think
and that I couldn't react to the situation. I have a great deal
of trouble assuming that Coyne was out of it, had entered a
descent to avoid the collision and found himself in a climb that
he initiated without knowing it. The assumption that he did
these things and forgot makes no sense to me, as a helicopter
pilot. Uncle Phil's explanation, that he unconsciously entered
the climb to avoid hitting the ground is, to me, unacceptable.

This does not mean that I accept the Coyne case as a flying
saucer, only that the reasoning for the evasive tactics used,
the unconscious entering of the climb, and the forgetting of
initiating the actions makes no sense to me.

In other words, as an experienced helicopter pilot, I find Uncle
Phil's explanation to be unacceptable. I'm sure that other
helicopter pilots have found these explanations unworkable.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 3

               Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 3 May 2001 09:04:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:15:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hamilton


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:33:46 -0000

 >>From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
 >>Subject: Forward: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >>PRG Paradigm Research Group

 >>[Forward of Press
 >>Released received by PRG.]

 >>PRESS RELEASE - April 26, 2001

 >>THE DISCLOSURE PROJECT

 >>For Immediate Release

 >>MILITARY, AGENCY WITNESSES TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY ON
 >>EXTRATERRESTRIAL PRESENCE; CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS SOUGHT

 >>Washington, DC - On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military,
 >>intelligence, government, c orporate and scientific witnesses
 >>will come forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC
 >>to establish the reality of UFOs as extraterrestrial vehicles,
 >>the presence of advanced extraterrestrial life forms, and
 >>sequestered advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The
 >>weight of this firsthand testimony, along with supporting
 >>government documentation and other evidence, will establish
 >>without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to
 >>Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Proje ct, which
 >>is hosting the event.

 ><snip>

 >>Disclosure Project Contact: Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302
 >>Media Relations: Janet Donovan 202-822-9318

 >Stephen,

 >And if you believe that megalomaniac Greer, I have a bridge in
 >Brooklyn to offer for sale to CSETI at a real bargain.

 >After you and he set back serious, scientific UFO research
 >another decade in the U.S., we will try our best to sweep up
 >after you, but with constantly increasing cynicism about the
 >intelligence and motives, not to mention the sincerity, of the
 >radical operatives at work here.


Richard,

I had the opportunity to read some of the transcribed testimony
of one Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and NRO
operative with cosmic top secret clearance. A friend let me read
it for my evaluation.

I was appalled by some of the things that Dan claimed including
his claim that "Cosmic Top Secret" (a NATO clearance level) was
38 levels above Top Secret (the familiar 38 levels of Bob Lazar
fame) and is the highest level of classification and solely
deals with alien material.

Hogwash!

This Master Sergeant does not understand security
classifications. Also, he referred to the testimony of his now
deceased friend, Phil Snyder, a man whose claims, upon
investigation, turned out to be pure drivel.

The next testimony after his was a little more convincing, but
it became apparent to me that Greer did not examine or check in
detail his eyewitness testimony.

The upshot is that, in addition to the alleged Roswell metal,
the need for more damage control. How did things get carried so
far?

I am afraid that I was equally sloppy in my research 10 years
ago, but now I have learned from folks like Hall, Friedman,
Macabee, Clark, and other esteemed and tireless researchers on
this List and there are a few, but they do not control the
public release of information, and certainly not what gets
printed or said in the media. Horrors! Do we need to
institutionialize UFO studies?


Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 3

                  Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:40:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:22:55 -0400
Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Randles


 >Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 05:57:23 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Source: TLC News

 >>http://tlc.discovery.com/news/news.html

 >>April 25 - The British Flying Saucer Bureau is closing after
 >>chronicling UFO activities for nearly 50 years - because of a
 >>sharp decline in the number of reported sightings.

 >>The group, which once had 1,500 members worldwide, used to
 >>receive at least 30 reports a week of sightings of unidentified
 >>flying objects, but they had now virtually dried up, the Times
 >>newspaper reported on Monday.

 >Is there somebody in the UK that can sort this all out?

Hi,

I would have done so a while ago but I have been off-line for a
week owing to illness at home.

 >Ostensibly, we have this rather likeable sounding chap who is
 >taking a well-earned retirement from UFO matters.

That pretty well sums it up. The BFSB was very much a small
local social club run by a few old stalwart Ufologists such as
Dennis who have not really been in the mainstream of Ufology for
a very long time. So they opted to call it a day. And I don't
blame them one bit if they felt it was time.

The media publicity hasn't been engineered. Its just been a story
that caught attention because it probably gave a different spin
on a subject that the media now consider tired (certainly in the
UK where media interest and book sales on UFOs have plummeted in
the past year or so). That it went global from there was
probably just down to good hype and a slow news day.

 >I get a picture of a fairly large UFO organization which
 >dwindled in numbers from the 1950s until recent years, when all
 >that was left were a few old-timers with their slide projector -
 >Bell and Howell perhaps?

It started as an offshoot of the Al Bender group (hence the
name) and I do actually discuss it in my l997 MIB book (so its
not totally unknown beyond these shores). It was only at the
fore of UK research long before I got involved (the l950s) and
with DIGAP - a similar kind of group formed in the north (the
BFSB formed in the south of the UK) just kept going whilst more
and more choosing to fulfil a social role.

UFO societies in the UK are much less political and ambitious
for the big action than in the US. They are often gathering
places for like minded people to meet  (most do so at local
pubs) and / or they chat over a cup of tea and biscuits.

Both the BFSB and DIGAP had roles in the creation of BUFORA -
Britain's largest national group - in l959-62. And once BUFORA
became 'the' national group BFSB and DIGAP settled into a more
local role. I have been to a few DIGAP meetings which would be
much like the BFSB ones I expect. They still exist and are (I
suspect) one of the worlds oldest UFO organisations - being
formed in about l954 I believe. But even in the North West -
where they are based - most Ufologists today would not know
about them since they are not a high profile investigation
group, have only maybe 20 members and don't get into the news
other than from time to time within their immediate area.

The same has long been true of the BFSB, which settled into the
groove of being a Bristol based team of just a few members even
before I entered Ufology 28 years ago. They haven't been in any
recognisable sense a national group or major player on the
British UFO scene in decades. Although in the early l990s they
had a hand in the first BUFORA conference that we staged in
Bristol  - it was largely symbolic - but I had the pleasure of
meeting Dennis Plunkett and a few others from the team then.

Dennis was, indeed, a nice, gentle man who recalled the olden
days when Ufology was new and space travel was still thought to
be bunk. He had a charm about him lost on most mobile phone
toting and aggressively marketed Ufologists of this new era.

The loss of the BFSB is a footnote in British UFO history but it
has had little impact on Ufology other than that. And - as noted
- there are a few local groups like BFSB still around - such as
DIGAP and also NARO in Manchester (renamed from MUFORA - the
Manchester UFO Research Association - but having been in
existence for almost 40 years now). Its unlikely that their
demise - if and when - would even make the local press let alone
the worlds media unless circumstances conspired (as here) to
make that happen.

 >I am troubled however by a few nagging details.

 >1) The newspaper account above does not make clear what part of
 >Britain the "legendary" group came from. Tabloids play tricks
 >like that, it sets off alarm bells.

Legendary is a misnomer. Original, pioneer, that's true enough.
As noted they have long been based almost exclusively in Bristol
and in no sense could be considered a player in the British UFO
scene.

 >2) How is it that nobody seems to have heard of the legendary
 >BFSB in the first place?

In the UK anyone who knew about British UFO history would have
done. And if they'd read my MIB book (which was published in the
US) anyone else would have come across the name. But most
Ufologists are very parochial and take little interest in our
heritage. BFSB were very much a group from another age and if
you had only been taking a passing interest in the UFO scene
over the past 30 years and lived outside of the West Country
then you would probably never have come across them since they
have never been involved in any activity to warrant attention
for at least that long.

 >3) How many members (approx.) did the BFSB have recent years?

I don't know for certain but we would be talking a mere handful
(maybe 20). Nothing like the hundreds of members in BUFORA, for
instance.


 >4) What is the date, name, place of publication of their most
 >recent newsletter or whatever?

I doubt they have published anything in decades. I haven't seen
anything at all during my 28 years in the field.

 >5) How can such a group create news by folding its tent, when
 >nobody knew it existed in the first place?

Slow news day. Hype. A persuasive reporter who saw his chance to
get a story sold. A new angle on UFOs (killing them off probably
appealed to the UK media as we love to do down our heroes). I
doubt very much there's any need for discerning a 'plot'. Its
just how these things work.

 >6) If Mr. Plunkett understands how easy it is to get mesmerized
 >by a computer screen, is there some chance he has a personal
 >email address?


Not so far as I know.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 19:20:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:02:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500


Hi Jerry,

 >What is it with debunkers that they just can't let go of one of
 >their own, however odious?  Aren't the rest of you glad you
 >aren't one of them? And why is it that Dave Clarke can't bring
 >himself to respond to Bruce Maccabee's clear and specific
 >criticisms of Menzel's methodology, preferring instead to turn
 >the usual tired pelicanist ad hominems on those aggravatingly
 >cheeky, iconoclastic ufologists? That's a rhetorical question,
 >by the way.

This was exactly as I expected - there you go playing to the
crowd again. First I get harried by the Sandows and Ledgers,
then they bring up the big guns, Jerry Clark and Bruce Maccabee
no less - lordy, I am not worthy.

Cue the Ufological choir - Ed Stewart was so, so, right.

To echo something Jerry once said, some of us have real lives to
live (those who aren't connected to the Internet 24 hours each
day) and I have more important priorities than responding to
Bruce Maccabee's "clear and specific criticisms" of Donald
Menzel.

It was never my intention to 'defend' Menzel, only to observe
the reaction of the ufological elite to the mere mention of his
name - plenty of food for thought there, and so little effort to
obtain a satisfying meal.

So now you can safely turn to the choir and tell them that
dastardly Menzel-loving debunker, the evil Dr Clarke, has not
responded therefore you have won the argument... (heard that
one before somewhere?)

You've seen off another of those pesky Brits - now back to the
wagon train!


Yours tongue-in-cheek

Dave Clarke











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 15:30:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:13:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:56:09 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >This does not mean that I accept the Coyne case as a flying
 >saucer, only that the reasoning for the evasive tactics used,
 >the unconscious entering of the climb, and the forgetting of
 >initiating the actions makes no sense to me.

 >In other words, as an experienced helicopter pilot, I find Uncle
 >Phil's explanation to be unacceptable. I'm sure that other
 >helicopter pilots have found these explanations unworkable.


Hi, Kevin:

Well, what would be another prosaic explanation - the co-pilot?
Then they would both have had to have forgotten, less likely
than only one.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 18:07:37 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:22:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +

 >>As for your comments about Occam's Razor and Menzel, what is is
 >>with you guys and Menzel? The bile and venom displayed on this
 >>list whenever his name is raised on this list is really
 >>something to behold. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so
 >>pathetic.

 >>Whatever the merits or otherwise of his UFO writings, he
 >>certainly seems to have hit a 'raw nerve' and continues to do
 >>so, years after his death.

 >>Food for thought!

Clearly the simplest explanation for those flying saucer reports
defying conventional explanation after investigation by
competent investigators, such as Dr. Bruce Maccabee, is that
they represent intelligently controlled ET spacecraft. What is
the big deal? The reports indicate these are manufactured and
behaving in ways we cannot duplicate, so somebody else made
them... Notice I didn't say anything about UFOs. Or are we to
assume that the universe, per Bishop Usher, was created in
4004BC and we are the only or at least the most advanced
civilization in it??

 >In which case you're dying of starvation, my friend.

 >What really is pathetic is the continuing silence of pelicanists
 >concerning Menzel's intellectual and ethical failings. McDonald
 >and others have richly documented Menzel's pseudoscientific
 >practices, which of course legions of camels will pass through
 >fields of needles before we see you and your fellow pelicanists
 >acknowledge even in whispers. You continue to ignore them and
 >act, weirdly but predictably, as if there were something wrong
 >with ufologists for daring to take issue with a man who, weirdly
 >but predictably, remains a debunking superhero.

 >Beyond that, consider this assessment of the man from a fellow
 >astronomer and noncombatant in the UFO wars:

 >"Menzel led a double life. The crusty astronomer was a
 >high-ranking agent of the National Security Agency..... He used
 >his position to blacken the reputations and damage the careers
 >of scientific opponents, produced fake research supporting his
 >masters, [and] betrayed his president [Eisenhower]..... The
 >seediest part of his career began in 1960. Menzel - still a
 >serving [intelligence] officer - offered to supply presidential
 >candidate John F. Kennedy with secret data on intelligence
 >activity during Ike's administration..... The files now reveal a
 >sordid stack of letters to JFK, abusing rivals and supposed
 >friends, and urging positions of authority be given to the
 >selfless Menzel. Many were." (Ian Seymour, in Astronomy Now,
 >December 1992)

I had seen this piece years ago and am convinced it is a vicious
and massive misrepresentation of the data in my Jan/Feb. 1988
International UFO Reporter Article 'The Secret Life of Donald H.
Menzel', which included these quotes from letters from Menzel to
JFK speaking of the NSA:


"I have been associated with this activity for almost 30
yearsand probably have the longest continuous record of
association of any person in the country. I still keep my close
association with them. Properly cleared to one another, I should
be able to help in this sensitive area." - August 13, 1960

"I have been a consultant to that activity with TOP SECRET
clearance and have also had some association with the CIA.
Obviously in an unclassified letter, I cannot go further into
detail." - November 3, 1960

Menzel also gave his frank assessment of Detlev Bronk and Hug
Drydenon Dec. 27, 1960... after the presidential election. There
is no treason here. Menzel had also noted that he had written a
report about the NSA for the Ike administration. There is no
sign of treason.

I discussed Menzel in more detail in a chapter of 'TOP
SECRET/MAJIC'. His first book was translated into Russian and
was favorably reviewed by Allen Hynek.

Certainly he had an enormous impact on the world scientific
community keeping them away from the subject of Flying Saucers.

 >In that general regard, it is worth noting that Menzel once
 >tried to get Blue Book to purchase the services of a consulting
 >group to take over its UFO work.

I found a contract Menzel had with Engineering Research
Associates a firm started by his WW II boss and working on
highly-classified cryptography work, for which he was paid at a
princely rate for the 1940s of $18,000/year. His classified
consulting work brought him in a great deal of money even in
retirement.

 >Menzel somehow neglected to
 >mention that he had a considerable financial stake in the
 >organization - the sort of scam that has caused not a few to
 >end up facing federal charges and serving time The Air Force
 >found out about Menzel's gross conflict of interest only
 >accidentally. Menzel was personally, intellectually, _and_
 >financially corrupt.

 >What is it with debunkers that they just can't let go of one of
 >their own, however odious? Aren't the rest of you glad you
 >aren't one of them? And why is it that Dave Clarke can't bring
 >himself to respond to Bruce Maccabee's clear and specific
 >criticisms of Menzel's methodology, preferring instead to turn
 >the usual tired pelicanist ad hominems on those aggravatingly
 >cheeky, iconoclastic ufologists? That's a rhetorical question,
 >by the way.

Using Occam's razor again, I would say the simplest explanation
for Menzel's unscientific behavior about UFOs is that he was a
member of MJ-12 amongst whose responsibilities was debunking UFO
reports so as to convince the press and especially the world
scientific community that there was nothing to them.

Remember [Wilbert] Smith's comment that this was the most
classified subject in the USA.

A close Harvard associate of Menzel for more than 20 years told
me that Menzel would have truly enjoyed knowing what was really
happening on the one hand and fooling the world on the other.

He was also, as I am sure most are aware, a writer of Science
Fiction and a writer of popular scientific articles. None was
better qualified to debunk UFOs. It would also explain that,
while Menzel had a copy of Blue Book Special Report 14 according
to correspondence with the USAF, he never mentioned it in his
books or papers.

Please don't tell me everybody knows MJ-12 was a fraud. As was
noted in the MUFON Journal January 2001. I rebutted that in
detail in March 2001.

Old maxim: Do homework first and get facts in hand before
leaping to conclusions.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 17:11:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:26:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sandow


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>You've demonstrated my point. Coyne said he operated the controls
 >>one way. Klass posits (and you do, too) that this couldn't have
 >>been true, no matter what Coyne said.

 >You are demonstrating my point: you don't actually read what
 >Uncle Phil or I have written. He said that since Coyne was an
 >experienced, well-trained pilot, he probably forgot. The fact
 >was, he didn't crash, the chopper rose up in altitude and they
 >were all saved from certain death. And Coyne was at the controls
 >when all of this happened. Well, maybe to co-pilot did it and
 >Coyne was right, but then the co-pilot would have forgotten
 >becasue he said he wasn't flying it.

 >Why is it that you have to believe so desperately that an [can't
 >say "ET", here] "something unkown" was in control?

Of course I've read both of you. I understand perfectly well
what you both said. It involves changing Coyne's account, so
that something happened that he says didn't.

I'm not - repeat not - saying that you and Phil are wrong. (How
many times, Bob, will I have to repeat that, before you get my
meaning?) I'm saying you both use a particular form of
reasoning, in which you change what Coyne said. You both could
be right in your conclusion. It's your certainty that surprises
me, along with the way it allows you to reject, with utter
comfort, the possibility of anything unknown.

And, just so you know... I don't "believe" - either with mild
conviction, fervor, or the desperation you imagine - that
something unknown happened. I don't have a clue.

Can't you tell the difference between a discussion of _how_ we
think about something, and _what_ we think about it?

 >And, while we're not on "ET", could provide a short list of the
 >possible things that could have happened?

I don't know. I'm not an expert on helicopters.

Besides, I'm not arguing the merits of the case. I'm talking,
once again, about how we approach it.

But if I _were_ arguing the merits, I wouldn't be required to
provide a list of things that could have happened. Nor is anyone
else who considers the case. First the facts, then the theories.
Your basic theory here seems to be that nothing unknown could
have happened, because you can't imagine what it could be. If
you'll agree to that, we can stop this nonsense.


Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 17:27:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:33:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Velez


 >Date: 3 May 2001 09:04:04 -0700
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:33:46 -0000

 >>>From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
 >>>Subject: Forward: Disclosure Project Press Release

<snip>

 >>>Washington, DC - On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military,
 >>>intelligence, government, c orporate and scientific witnesses
 >>>will come forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC
 >>>to establish the reality of UFOs as extraterrestrial vehicles,
 >>>the presence of advanced extraterrestrial life forms, and
 >>>sequestered advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The
 >>>weight of this firsthand testimony, along with supporting
 >>>government documentation and other evidence, will establish
 >>>without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to
 >>>Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Proje ct, which
 >>>is hosting the event.

 >><snip>

 >>>Disclosure Project Contact: Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302
 >>>Media Relations: Janet Donovan 202-822-9318

 >>Stephen,

 >>And if you believe that megalomaniac Greer, I have a bridge in
 >>Brooklyn to offer for sale to CSETI at a real bargain.

 >>After you and he set back serious, scientific UFO research
 >>another decade in the U.S., we will try our best to sweep up
 >>after you, but with constantly increasing cynicism about the
 >>intelligence and motives, not to mention the sincerity, of the
 >>radical operatives at work here.

 >Richard,

 >I had the opportunity to read some of the transcribed testimony
 >of one Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and NRO
 >operative with cosmic top secret clearance. A friend let me read
 >it for my evaluation.

 >I was appalled by some of the things that Dan claimed including
 >his claim that "Cosmic Top Secret" (a NATO clearance level) was
 >38 levels above Top Secret (the familiar 38 levels of Bob Lazar
 >fame) and is the highest level of classification and solely
 >deals with alien material.

 >Hogwash!

 >This Master Sergeant does not understand security
 >classifications. Also, he referred to the testimony of his now
 >deceased friend, Phil Snyder, a man whose claims, upon
 >investigation, turned out to be pure drivel.

 >The next testimony after his was a little more convincing, but
 >it became apparent to me that Greer did not examine or check in
 >detail his eyewitness testimony.

 >The upshot is that, in addition to the alleged Roswell metal,
 >the need for more damage control. How did things get carried so
 >far?

 >I am afraid that I was equally sloppy in my research 10 years
 >ago, but now I have learned from folks like Hall, Friedman,
 >Macabee, Clark, and other esteemed and tireless researchers on
 >this List and there are a few, but they do not control the
 >public release of information, and certainly not what gets
 >printed or said in the media.

Hiya Bill, Dick, All,

Bill wrote:

 >Horrors! Do we need to institutionialize UFO studies?

Yessir! We most _certainly_ do. At least as a start. Right now
ufology has no real credibility. That's due to the fact that
there is no (accountability) on the part of any of the
individuals that participate in it. By establishing and
maintaining accepted standards of quality and accountability,
such an 'institution' would help to establish _credibility_ for
ufology at the same time. Without that 'institutional' guarantee
of accountability, ufology will never enjoy any greater degree
of credibility than it currently does. (Which is little or
none.)

Why not "institutionalize" ufology? If it helps to bring us
any closer to "reliable" answers, then I'm all for it. Speaking
as a 'witness' I wouldn't mind seeing ethical standards and
protocols _codified_ within an 'institutional' environment that
can guarantee/enforce penalties for its violation by member
research personnel. Even if only via excommunication from the
larger umbrella organization. And all for the sake of witness
protection.

Re: Greer

I am in complete agreement with Richard regarding Dr. Greer's
proposed "Disclosure" session in Washington. I think he is going
to cause much more damage than anyone can currently imagine. The
end result may be that, the possibility of getting an open
public hearing on the question of UFOs (by our own government
representatives) will be pushed back for decades.

I might even venture a shot-in-the-dark 'guess' that that may be
the 'real purpose' of Greer's 'Discredit' project. <VBEG>

They must be laughing their asses silly over at NSA or whatever
gov't operation is responsible for monitoring the doings in the
UFO community. It must be like watching someone shoot themselves
in the foot over and over again! Toe after toe blasted away
until there is nothing left but an ineffective stump to use for
walking. In the meantime, the 'agents' who watch over us can
play golf all day. They can just sit back and concern themselves
with taking strokes off their game because we (ufology) are
doing their job _for them_ better than they could ever do it
themselves!


Regards,

John Velez
Walking on broken glass


                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                            Re: More Occam - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 21:49:45 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:36:59 -0400
Subject: Re: More Occam - Hall


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: More Occam
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:07:42 -0400

 >My post on Occam may have been a lot to digest, especially for
 >people who don't know physics. I'll try to simplify.

 >I quoted an FAQ on Occam's Razor from a physics website. Most of
 >it talked about the misuse of the principle.

 >The principle itself was formulated, supposedly, by a Franciscan
 >friar in the 14th century. It's been translated from Latin
 >(already there are problems knowing which formulation is
 >authentic), and then reinterpreted and reworded more times,
 >probably, than anyone can count.

 >Maybe that's the first thing to understand. It's not a law of
 >nature, not something you can state once and for all in any
 >authoritative form. It's a rule of thumb, in effect handed down
 >from scientist to scientist.

<snip>

 >There's no way to decide between these theories. Occam doesn't
 >apply. The theory of parsimony is misleading, because it takes
 >us away from facts and data. It makes life and science simpler
 >than they really are. It rules out the alien explanation, simply
 >because someone subjectively prefers the other one. But it
 >doesn't tell us that the alien explanation is less likely. We
 >may believe that for all sorts of reasons -- but they have
 >nothing to do with Occam's Razor.

Bravo, Music Man! Just as I have said about Budd Hopkins, you
behave (argue and use facts and logic) more scientifically than
many scientists or "defenders of science" do.


Dick Hall
B.A., Philosophy










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:42:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000

 >>Go ahead and see if you can find prosaic explanations for any of
 >>the 18 or 20 cases. That would be a definite contribution.
 >>However, if nothing else a debate on these cases would at least
 >>help to make overt the assumptions, logic, and reasoning that a
 >>skeptibunker (I like that term) and a UFO advocate use to argue
 >>their respective positions. I think that is worthwhile in
 >>itself, and don't really expect we will change each others (or
 >>anyone else's) minds.

 >Dick,

 >Probably not, but it might be worth the effort, anyway. But, I
 >thought we were discussing your hypothesis, as you restated
 >below,

 >>My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >>evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in this
 >>article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >>various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or identical
 >>to the cases illustrated in this article, are what make the ETH
 >>the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the present debate,
 >>I am willing to base my argument on these 18 cases.


Bob,

Exactly what is the difference between "discussing [my]
hypothesis" and trying to explain the 18 cases? How can you do
one without the other?

 >I began the examination of your 18 cases,

You "began the examination of [my] 18 cases" by making a classic
appeal to authority. Suppose I were to make a counter-appeal to
scientists who do think my cited cases support the ETH. And, by
the way, they would be scientists who have _actually_ studied
UFO cases.

 >>>In 1997 a group of nine scientists took part in a panel which
 >>>reviewed evidence put forward by a group of UFOlogists. This
 >>>became known as the Pocantico Workshop or "Sturrock
 >>>Workshop", after the moderator, Peter Sturrock. A report,
 >>>"PhysicalEvidence Related to UFO Reports" was published in
 >>>the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, p. 170, and can
 >>>be found, with supporting information, at the magazine's site,

 >>>http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/
 >>>sturrock/toc.html

 >>>Among the cases presented to the panel were [two] on your
 >>>list:

 >>>#5) 10/18/73 Mansfield, Ohio, helicopter incident.

 >>>#17 23/27/80, Huffman, Texas, Cash-Landrum incident.

 >>>The conclusions of the Sturrock Panel stated,

 >>>"It was clear that at least a few reported incidents might have
 >>>involved rare but significant phenomena such as electrical
 >>>activity high above thunderstorms (e.g., sprites) or rare cases
 >>>of radar ducting. On the other hand, the review panel was not
 >>>convinced that any of the evidence involved currently unknown
 >>>physical processes or pointed to the involvement of an
 >>>extraterrestrial intelligence."

 >>Which of course, without actually applying these "explanations"
 >>to specific cases, you would prefer to believe.

 >The point isn't what I would prefer to believe, but that these
 >nine scientists, handpicked by Peter Sturrock and including no
 >known UFO skeptics, concluded that these two cases provided no
 >evidence which would support your hypothesis.

The point is that you are citing these scientists as credible
authorities (rather than doing your own evaluations), and making
a number of dubious assumptions to boot. I don't know that the
scientists were "handpicked by Peter Sturrock" and they
certainly didn't include any UFO believers. Nor do I have any
reason to beleive that they have _actually_ studied _any_ UFO
cases on their own. A very short "briefing", disturbingly
similar to the Robertson Panel in 1953, in which "science" was
subservient to public relations.

 >>Also, you ought to take a look at Bernard Haisch's web
 >>site that someone posted on this list a while back:
 >>www.ufoskeptic.org Haisch is a professional astronomer of
 >>considerable experience who established this site out of concern
 >>that scientists are too readily and glibly discarding UFO
 >>reports without proper study.

 >Haisch's website provides a link to the Sturrock Panel report,
 >without any comment. This suggests to me that he must be
 >endorsing it.

It doesn't suggest any such thing to me. My own web site and
those of CUFOS, etc., provide links to all sorts of web sites on
all sides of the issue, and your interpretation here is mightily
convenient, while of course ignoring everything else on the
Haisch web site (which all observant parties should look at for
themselves).

<snip>

 >So, to restate my question in my previous post, has any new
 >evidence for the Coyne and Cash-Landrum cases surfaced since
 >this 1997 Sturrock Panel study, which concluded (see above) that
 >these two cases, as well as the others presented, did not
 >represent evidence for the ETH?

You have not offered any convincing explanation of these two
cases. If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
area.

Moving right along--

 >#12, the April 17, 1966 police chase from Ravenna, Ohio to
 >Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

 >The witness, officer Dale Spaur, described the brilliant UFO as
 >disappearing in the morning sky as the Sun rose after the long
 >chase. Many commentators have viewed this last object as very
 >likely the Planet Venus. One view is that the genuine UFO was
 >present during the early part of the incident, but that Venus
 >was seen, and chased, later.

 >One could observe that none of us were there, but the witness
 >was. If the witness misidentified Venus after chasing the object
 >for nearly two hours, what would make one thing that the
 >witnesses didn't recognize exactly what they had been chasing
 >for two hours?

Huh? What sort of "logic" or "reason" is this? Looks purely like
sleight-of-hand to me!

 >In short, Venus seems to me to be the probable explanation for
 >the incident.

_If_ (which I have to doubt) you have actually read the report
on this case (almost any detailed summary version of it), then
what was the object that rose up alongside the road, where the
two police officers were investigating an abandoned vehicle, and
brightly illuminated them and their patrol car? And when they
began chasing this structured, craftlike thing across Ohio and
Pennsylvania and several other police officers en route saw both
the object at low level and the Ravenna police in hot pursuit,
what was that? Venus?

 >To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
this semantical game. You can falsify my hypothesis by offering
convincing prosaic or mundane explanations for "my" 18 cases.
You are off to a very poor start.

So far you have appealed to authority to wipe out the Coyne and
Cash-Landrum cases, without offering any reasonable explanations
and without addressing the salient features of the cases. And
you have stated that Venus is a reasonable explanation for the
Ravenna case, although that is entirely counter-to-fact. If you
really believe that rather incredible hypothesis, then it is
incumbent upon you to explain the features of the case that I
have cited above.


Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                 Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:55:30 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:57:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Hall


 >Date: 3 May 2001 09:04:04 -0700
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:33:46 -0000

 >>>From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
 >>>Subject: Forward: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >>>Disclosure Project Contact: Dr. Steven Greer 540-456-8302
 >>>Media Relations: Janet Donovan 202-822-9318

 >>Stephen,

 >>And if you believe that megalomaniac Greer, I have a bridge in
 >>Brooklyn to offer for sale to CSETI at a real bargain.

 >>After you and he set back serious, scientific UFO research
 >>another decade in the U.S., we will try our best to sweep up
 >>after you, but with constantly increasing cynicism about the
 >>intelligence and motives, not to mention the sincerity, of the
 >>radical operatives at work here.

 >Richard,

 >I had the opportunity to read some of the transcribed testimony
 >of one Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and NRO
 >operative with cosmic top secret clearance. A friend let me read
 >it for my evaluation.

 >I was appalled by some of the things that Dan claimed including
 >his claim that "Cosmic Top Secret" (a NATO clearance level) was
 >38 levels above Top Secret (the familiar 38 levels of Bob Lazar
 >fame) and is the highest level of classification and solely
 >deals with alien material.

 >Hogwash!

 >This Master Sergeant does not understand security
 >classifications. Also, he referred to the testimony of his now
 >deceased friend, Phil Snyder, a man whose claims, upon
 >investigation, turned out to be pure drivel.

 >The next testimony after his was a little more convincing, but
 >it became apparent to me that Greer did not examine or check in
 >detail his eyewitness testimony.

 >The upshot is that, in addition to the alleged Roswell metal,
 >the need for more damage control. How did things get carried so
 >far?

 >I am afraid that I was equally sloppy in my research 10 years
 >ago, but now I have learned from folks like Hall, Friedman,
 >Macabee, Clark, and other esteemed and tireless researchers on
 >this List and there are a few, but they do not control the
 >public release of information, and certainly not what gets
 >printed or said in the media. Horrors! Do we need to
 >institutionialize UFO studies?


Bill,

Thanks for this 'testimonial'. I have observed the liars and
frauds, and (contrary to the belief of some of my closest
friends and colleagues) the disinformation specialists at work
for several decades. I truly believe that.

The pseudoscience of alleged 'alien implants' and Roswell
artifacts is not merely the work of ignoramuses or people with
axes to grind, it all too conveniently discredits the entire
effort to bring serious attention to UFOs. Naive and gullible
'ufologists' (especially those seeking to become major players)
are extremely vulnerable to this kind of manipulation.


Dick Hall

P.S. I expect to hear from Jerry Clark on this. He utterly
disagrees with me about disinformation stuff. But then, I live
in (near) Washington, D.C., and he lives in the Minnesota
boondocks. (Just kidding, Jerry.)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                    Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 23:09:33 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 12:22:01 -0400
Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hall


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:40:04 +0100


By this post, which I have deleted in the interest of conserving
space, Jenny Randles has confirmed what I already believed about
her; namely that she is a supremely well-informed, aware, and
sensitive commentator on the UFO scene. (Jenny: I hope this is
not the "kiss of death" by my saying this. It should also be
noted that you and I disagree about many particular things and
even about theories.)

What I am seeing is someone who has actually investigated
innumerable cases, attended conferences internationally, written
up reports and books laying out her facts and arguments, and
shared her invaluable insights on UFO UpDates and elsewhere, and
patiently answered all kinds of stupid - and sometimes good -
questions free of charge. She certainly is the antithesis to
Bobbie Fleder's rural Mississippi viewpoint that "elitist"
ufologists are a bunch of mercenaries.


- Dick Hall


[See: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m03-034.shtml --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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

               Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 20:57:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 13:52:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Aldrich


 >Date: 3 May 2001 09:04:04 -0700
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:33:46 -0000

 >>>From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 22:52:26 -0400
 >>>Subject: Forward: Disclosure Project Press Release

<snip>

 >Richard,

 >I had the opportunity to read some of the transcribed testimony
 >of one Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force and NRO
 >operative with cosmic top secret clearance. A friend let me read
 >it for my evaluation.

 >I was appalled by some of the things that Dan claimed including
 >his claim that "Cosmic Top Secret" (a NATO clearance level) was
 >38 levels above Top Secret (the familiar 38 levels of Bob Lazar
 >fame) and is the highest level of classification and solely
 >deals with alien material.

 >Hogwash!

 >This Master Sergeant does not understand security
 >classifications. Also, he referred to the testimony of his now
 >deceased friend, Phil Snyder, a man whose claims, upon
 >investigation, turned out to be pure drivel.

 >The next testimony after his was a little more convincing, but
 >it became apparent to me that Greer did not examine or check in
 >detail his eyewitness testimony.

 >The upshot is that, in addition to the alleged Roswell metal,
 >the need for more damage control. How did things get carried so
 >far?

 >I am afraid that I was equally sloppy in my research 10 years
 >ago, but now I have learned from folks like Hall, Friedman,
 >Maccabee, Clark, and other esteemed and tireless researchers on
 >this List and there are a few, but they do not control the
 >public release of information, and certainly not what gets
 >printed or said in the media. Horrors! Do we need to
 >institutionialize UFO studies?


Bravo Bill!!!

There really is not such thing as a COSMIC Top Secret Clearance.

There is a Top Secret clearance and certain people in units with
the proper authority can see NATO Top Secret material. People
granted access to NATO Top Secret documents - COSMIC Top Secret
documents - have that authority noted on the unit clearance
roster. There is also a briefing document, kept by the Security
Manager in his file, that shows the individual has been briefed
on the handling of NATO documents. This briefing document does
not transfer from one unit to another and is executed again in
the new unit of assignment.

COSMIC clearance or more properly 'access' does not transfer
from one unit to another. If a person is reassigned the COSMIC
access must be granted again by the new unit, if required.

I served in four different organisations in Europe. My clearance
was Top Secret.

In two units, my access was Cosmic Top Secret Atomal. I was also
Top Secret Control Officer and COSMIC Top Secret Control
Officers in both these units.

My third and fourth European assignment was during the
deactivation of a Field Artillery Group in Italy as an Assistant
Adjutant and later on the General's special staff in the safety
office, in these last two cases my access was Secret, even
though my clearance continued to be Top Secret.

I guess that is a hard concept for some people. Access, i.e.,
'need to know' is the basis of the classified material system.

38 degrees above Top Secret is indeed Hogwash!!!!!

Again, this shows how well Greer vetted his witnesses. Not!

And once again, if Greer can "vector" alien spacecraft into an
area, he should be able to produce all kinds of technical data
on them. But he can't produce one iota of technical data, and
all we have is a group of witnesses, some which are definitely
telling tall tales.


Jan Aldrich

Former Security Manager
Classified Document Custodian
Top Secret Control Officer
Cosmic Top Secret Control Officer
COMSEC Custodian
Nuclear Release Authentication System official








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                     More Lords Q & A On Rendlesham Case

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 02:06:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 13:56:24 -0400
Subject: More Lords Q & A On Rendlesham Case


More House of Lords Q & A on Rendlesham UFO case

[Question 1 concerns the missing prison journals with reference
to prisons being put on alert during time of UFO incident]

26 April 2001
Blundeston Prison and Hollesley Bay YOI: Possible Evacuation

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 23
January (WA 8), whether their search for evidence of any
instructions concerning the possible evacuation of Blundeston
Prison and Hollesley Bay Young Offender Institution included an
examination of the governor's journals for these two
establishments; and whether these journals have been retained.
[HL1809]


The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord
Bassam of Brighton):

Governors' journals are the most likely source of this
information so long after the event. The governor's journal at
Blundeston remains in existence and was examined.

The relevant governor's journal for Hollesley Bay could not now
be found, and in the absence of any other written record,
long-serving staff, including the governor's secretary, were
consulted. They did not recall any instruction to prepare for an
evacuation although they well remembered the local events of the
time which prompted speculation about such an instruction.

Rendlesham Forest: Tree Felling

Lord Hill-Norton asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they requested or instructed the Forestry Commission to
fell any trees in Rendlesham Forest or Tanham Woods in the
aftermath of the Rendlesham Forest incident; and, if so, on what
grounds.[HL1810]

Baroness Hayman:

The Forestry Commission was not instructed to fell any trees
after the alleged incident in Rendlesham Forest in December
1980. Most of the trees in the area had been selected and marked
for felling well before the alleged incident and were felled
several months after it.

30 Apr 2001 : Column WA249


"You Can't Tell The People".The Definitive Account of the
Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery by Georgina Bruni. Published by
Sidgwick & Jackson Available on-line at: www.amazon.co.uk
Countries outside UK: www.netstoreusa.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                         The Real X-Files - 05-01-01

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 02:06:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 14:02:42 -0400
Subject: The Real X-Files - 05-01-01


HOT GOSSIP UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk

THE REAL X-FILES

Hello everyone, and welcome to the May issue of The Real
X-Files. It has been a tremendously busy month, with lots of new
information having been forwarded by a variety of sources.I
would like to extend my appreciation to all those who have
offered information and wishes of good luck to the Open Minds
Society at the University of Oxford. For those who missed my
report on the society and its goals in the last issue of Hot
Gossip, more information can be found at the Open Minds Web
site: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~openmind


GEORGINA BRUNI TO ADDRESS STUDENTS AT OXFORD UNIVERSITY

Hot Gossip's very own editor in chief, Georgina Bruni, has
kindly accepted an invitation to speak at this month's Open
Minds seminar at Somerville College, Oxford University. As most
readers will know, Georgina is the author of the excellent
investigative book, 'You Can't Tell the People', a work which
derives its title from a conversation between the author and
Baroness Thatcher in 1998. "UFOs?" the Iron Lady remarked, "You
must get your facts right �and you can't tell the people."

I strongly recommend that anyone who has not read this
fascinating and well-researched work do so at the first
available opportunity; it provides a strong case for a genuine
mystery that should not be ignored.

Admittance to Georgina's lecture is restricted to members of
Oxford University and other invited parties. So anyone
interested in attending can email me for further information.

UFO MAGAZINE CONTESTS 'DECLINE IN SIGHTINGS'

The editor of 'UFO Magazine', Graham Birdsall, has responded to
suggestions made in the UK Press that reports and belief in the
existence of UFOs is declining. The allegations were made in the
April 23rd edition of the Times, which reported that the British
Flying Saucer Bureau has suspended its activities because of an
apparent sharp decline in the number of 'alien visitors' to
Earth.

'To have one of the most respected newspaper titles in the world
publish unfounded remarks about the UFO subject on the strength
of a group of individuals who most of you will have never heard
of is 'unfair' to say the least in my mind,' said Graham, who
earlier this year impressed students at Oxford University with
his knowledge on the subject.

Mr. Denis Plunkett, a 70-year-old retired civil servant from
Bristol, founded the bureau in 1953 with his late father, Edgar.
However, he now believes that UFO sightings have 'all but dried
up'.

"The problem is that we are in the middle of a long, long
trough," said Mr Plunkett. "There just aren't enough new
sightings".

The editor of the Times stated that 'belief in UFOs is
declining, basing his claim on the fact that the British Flying
Saucer Bureau is suspending its activities. Why on earth he
should choose to derive such a substantive conclusion from the
fact that a little-known research group has ceased its
activities has raised serious questions amongst members of the
UFO research community.

"If UFOs and the people who see and continue to report them are
all deemed to have been mistaken or influenced by external
factors, such as the X-Files, how does that explain the 3,500
military and civilian pilots who have chosen to report their UFO
sighting officially?" asked Graham Birdsall.

In his response to the Times, Graham points out that reports and
belief in UFOs is not declining. Quite the opposite. "The
total number of alleged UFO sightings recorded in the first
quarter of this year here in Britain shows a 50 per cent
increase when compared to the same corresponding period last
year", said Graham.

"There are currently 80 recognised UFO groups and organisations
evenly spread throughout the United Kingdom, most of which
continue to generate an abundance of UFO reports by means of
active research and investigation." I shall not quote in full
Graham's response, as it is readily available at
www.ufomag.co.uk but let us hope that his comments are given the
fair and responsible recognition they deserve.

Personally I am in little doubt that something is indeed flying
around, as the following report suitably illustrates.

MISSING TIME

The Open Minds Society at Oxford University recently received
the following interesting account of missing time from a witness
whose details shall remain anonymous for the present, until
further enquiries can be made:

Recalling an unusual encounter he experienced in October 1999,
the witness states:

"My experience happened when my wife and I were leaving my
brother's house at Teignmouth, a coastal town in Devon. It was
gone midnight and we were travelling back to our house at
Aylesbeare about seventeen miles away, driving the coastal road.
On the way back I found myself outside of the car in the middle
of no-where. When my wife and I went to get back in the car
(although we do not remember getting out of the car) the car was
not locked (something I always do when I get out). The car was
also facing the wrong way around. I got back in to reverse the
car, so it was facing the right direction, when I saw an object
with a bright blue light shinning down in a field about eighty
yards away, which also turned as I reversed, and continued to
follow us all the way home. My wife said, "That thing's
following us!" I said, "I know!"

"My wife was quite frightened about the experience, but when we
got home she got out of the car to open the gates of our
driveway and the garage doors, and then she went inside. I then
drove the car up the driveway and into the garage. I went to
lock the garage doors and realised the object was hovering at
about forty feet in the air above my gates. I tried to look up
but found that I could not move my head or even avert my eyes.
I looked across to the grassy bank about ten feet from my gates
to see if the grass was moving, which I was not. Also, there
was no sound whatsoever, it was then I realised the object had
complete control over me. As I turned to walk up to the front
door I saw the object disappear back to the way it had followed
us."

I am currently investigating this and other similar cases, and
will make a full report available through the usual channels
when the investigation is complete.


CHEMTRAILS OVER WALES?

The photographs below were taken at 6.15am on the 17th April
2001, by a gentleman living in Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales.
They purport to depict enigmatic chemtrails like those reported
recently in the press.

(check site for photos)

The witness to these chemtrails, Mr. Derek Gough, is insistent
that they are unlike the conventional vapour trails, which, he
argues, disperse and disappear from view within minutes. In
contrast, the chemtrails depicted in his images, he claims, did
not disappear like usual short-lived contrails, but spread out
like clouds and remained visible in the sky for hours.

Mysteriously, upon developing and enhancing the photographs, Mr
Gough detected a silver object visible in the sky depicted in
one of the images.He did not notice it when taking the
photographs.

Mr Gough's images follow a disturbing incident which occurred on
Thursday 15th February 2001, when a mysterious white substance
rained down from an aircraft on children at the Lairg Primary
School in Scotland.

Northern Constabulary's Inverness-based acting deputy chief
constable,Ramsay McGhee, said: "I am ninety per cent sure it is
something which has emanated from an aircraft, possibly a
military aircraft, and we are speaking to the military at the
moment. No one is aware of any other aircraft in the area."

"Some of the younger children described seeing a plastic bag
with white powder (fall) from the plane, but older children and
parents said they had seen a black cloud coming from the
aircraft," said Head Teacher Isobel Gillies.

Which begs the question, of course. What are these enigmatic
chemtrails?In order to press for answers, Mr Gough hopes to
bring his photographs to the attention of his local Member of
Parliament. In the meantime, anyone with any information
pertaining to the chemtrail phenomenon can contact Mr Gough at
confidentialwitenss@ask.co.uk

PUZZLING 'PROOF' FOR THE EXISTENCE OF YETI

The search for one of the world's most enigmatic creatures has
ended in a mystery. Researchers for the Channel Four programme
'Hunt for the Wildman', are baffled by their failure to identify
a hair follicle found in the deepest forests of Bhutan, where
the legendary creature has reportedly been seen.

Professor Bryan Sykes, a renowned DNA researcher at the Oxford
Institute for Molecular Medicine has analysed the hair specimen.
However, genetic tests have failed to match the DNA of any known
animal. Although Professor Sykes will not yet claim that the
hair actually belongs to the Yeti, he admits it is puzzling.
"It's a mystery, and I never thought this would end in a
mystery," he said. "We have never encountered DNA that we
couldn't recognise before."

Witnesses to the Yeti include a King's Royal Guard, who spoke of
his sighting for the Channel Four documentary. "Suddenly I saw
a creature like an ape. For two or three minutes we stood
opposite each other. It was huge. It must have been nine feet
tall. The arms were enormous and hairy."The hair follicle is
long and curly, and is roughly the same size as acotton ball.
It was found on the bark of a Cedar tree in a forest in the
eastern part of the country where the creature is reputed to
live. Professor Sykes said, "It's certainly mysterious. There
was a nice plump hair follicle. We normally wouldn't have any
difficulty at all�."


TIME STORMS

Those with an interest in UFOs and paranormal phenomena may have
noticed that Jenny Randles, Britain's most prolific author on
the subject, has recently released a new book entitled 'Time
Storms'. Randles is perhaps best known for her hard-line
research into UFOs, which often aims to consider all possible
explanations, instead of leaping, as so many authors do, to the
extraterrestrial hypothesis. But her latest book is an
interesting twist on a popular theme, exploring the possibility
that holes in time may occur on a regular basis as the result of
a strange phenomenon.

As David V Barrett summarises:

A lot of cases claimed by "Ufologists" involve strange mists,
reports of missing time - usually just a couple of hours - or
people or things inexplicably being shifted in space. In the
first half of her book Randles gives a large number of examples
of these, and of similarly unusual accounts. Many of them are
accompanied by what has become known as "the Oz Factor", "an
eerie stillness and silence; the flow of time stopping
inexplicably and leaving a numbing timelessness". All of these
she sees as linked effects suggesting a disturbance of the
space-time continuum, rather than anything to do with UFOs.

'After the empirical - or at least, anecdotal - evidence, the
second half of the book is as clear and straightforward an
explanation as one might wish for of such complex issues as
relativity theory, quantum physics and Schrdinger's cat. In
proposing that what she calls "time storms" might eventually be
scientifically explicable, Randles inevitably raises more
questions than answers, but in this fascinating book she is
pointing the way towards some intriguing future research.'

NEXT MONTH

Clearly, we are still finding ourselves perpetually astonished
by life, unprepared for whatever bewildering puzzling facts or
scenarios it throws at us. In witness to this claim, we can look
forward to next month's column, where I shall be including a
comprehensive summary of Georgina Bruni's lecture at Somerville
College, as well as further recent British UFO and abduction
reports. So until then my friends, keep watching the skies.

Neil Spring

Neil.Spring@some.ox.ac.uk

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Neil Spring is the founding member and
President of the student research group 'Open Minds', at Oxford
University. His previously published material can be found at:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~openmind








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                     Nick Pope's Weird World - 05-01-01

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 02:06:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 14:08:04 -0400
Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World - 05-01-01


NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD
Hot Gossip UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk

Welcome to the May 2001 round-up of news and views from the
world of ufology, the paranormal, strange mysteries, the weird
and the wonderful.

The Mammoth Book of UFOs

Robinson publish a whole series of these books, and their latest
offering is well worth a look if you're interested in UFOs.
These hefty compilation books can be a hit or miss affair, but
this 150,000 word tome looks to be a first rate overview of the
UFO mystery.

The author Lynn Picknett is ideally-placed to have written this
book. She was Deputy Editor of the classic partwork The
Unexplained, and also edited The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal.
More recently she's collaborated with Clive Prince, with whom
she's co-authored Turin Shroud, The Templar Revelation and The
Stargate Conspiracy. This latter project has clearly influenced
Lynn's thinking on ufology, and the connections that she draws
between trickster entities and the Nine are particularly
fascinating. This linking of occult, paranormal and ufology
won't go down well with everyone, and may upset sceptics and
pro-ETH believers alike. But Lynn's a dedicated and honest
researcher who goes where the data take her, and these
connections can't be ignored, whatever one's established
beliefs. This comprehensive book is well-researched and
well-written. It is highly recommended.


Crop Circle's in Popular Culture

Circle Master organic ale is the latest example of how the
crop circle phenomenon is becoming part of the popular
culture. Named in honour of the skilful character (the label
makes no definitive statement about the identity of such
characters) who creates such patterns in the crop fields, this
ale should be available from most of the big supermarket
chains and specialist off-licences. Details are at
www.wychwood.co.uk and I can thoroughly recommend
this tasty and refreshing product, which I sampled
extensively, for research purposes, of course.


New Magazine Out Now

As previously trailed in this column, May sees the launch of a
sensational new magazine concentrating on the shadowy world of
intelligence, espionage, secret services and military-related
matters. There will be eight issues of Eye Spy! each year, and
they'll cost �2.95 each. An annual subscription will cost �20
and details are on the www.eyespymag.com website. This
publication promises to be interesting and controversial. It's
edited by Mark Birdsall, who previously worked on UFO Magazine
and The Unopened Files.


Double Standards

Britain in 1941: beaten back but defiant. Facing down the
Nazi menace but united behind Winston Churchill and
prepared to fight until the last. Right? Er, well, maybe not.

Behind the myths about our finest hour, rumours have long
circulated that many senior politicians were ready to conclude
a peace deal with Hitler. Now there's an important new book
that could really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Double Standards: The Rudolph Hess Cover-up examines the
extraordinary circumstances surrounding the flight to Britain on
10 May 1941 of Deputy Fuhrer Rudolph Hess.

The book suggests the intriguing theory that Hess had flown to
discuss terms with the Duke of Hamilton, with the full knowledge
and support of certain members of the aristocracy. There's also
the suggestion of a Royal connection, with new witness testimony
pointing to the conclusion that the Duke of Kent (who later died
in a mysterious aircraft accident) knew of the mission and was
at the Duke of Hamilton's estate at the time of Hess's flight.

The authors suggest that Hess was to have landed at the Duke's
estate, but that he failed to find it and had to bale out of his
Messerschmitt Me-110. They conclude that once Hess was captured,
handed to the Home Guard and recognised, the powerful peace
lobby were forced to deny any knowledge or involvement with
Hess's mission.

Hess died in Spandau prison in 1987, under circumstances that
some still believe to have been suspicious. Double Standards is
written by Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince and Stephen Prior, with
Robert Brydon, and is published by Little Brown.


UFO Magazine

The latest edition of UFO magazine went on sale on 26 April,
so should be in the shops now. As ever, it's well worth
checking out, and contains the usual mixture of breaking news,
in-depth analysis, photographs and reviews. Details are at
www.ufomag.co.uk and this site is well worth checking out,
and adding to your list of favourites. Tickets for their Leeds
annual conference on 21, 22 and 23 September are apparently
selling quickly (hardly surprising given that both Budd Hopkins
and John Mack will make rare UK appearances), so you're
advised to book up soon. Again, details are in the magazine
and on the website.


NASA Aircraft to Break Speed Record

This month will see the first unpiloted test flight of NASA's
new X-43A aircraft, which should accelerate up to a speed of
around 7200 mph, mashing the existing speed record. This is
a prototype �scramjet', a revolutionary new design which
scoops up oxygen from the atmosphere instead of having to
carry it. These so-called �air-breathing' engines are the next
step in the evolution of aircraft, and although development of
operational aircraft is still years away, the prospect of Mach 10,
hypersonic flight is eagerly awaited. Commercial applications
are still further ahead, but the statistic most often quoted in the
media is that this would reduce the flight time from London to
New York to thirty minutes.


Ghost Hunt

Over a ten day period 250 volunteers carried out a ghost hunt
in the vaults and tunnels around Edinburgh Castle in Scotland.
An incredible 44% of people reported strange experiences of
some type, ranging from anomalous sounds and lights, feelings
of being touched, and anomalies on various photographs and
videos. Co-ordinator Dr Richard Wiseman from the University
of Hertfordshire remains open-minded about the cause,
acknowledging that the dampness and cold might be a factor.
But he did say that most of the experiences happened in those
parts of the vault which are reputed to be the most haunted.
Clearly there may be other factors at work too, such as the
beliefs of the volunteers, but studies like this are important,
and should go some way towards encouraging further and
increasingly scientific study of ghosts.

Nick Pope's four books, Open Skies, Closed Minds, The
Uninvited, Operation Thunder Child and Operation Lightning
Strike are available from most good bookshops and from all
the usual Internet book sites. His British publishers are Simon
& Schuster. In America, his first two books are published in
hardback by The Overlook Press and in mass-market paperback
by Dell Publishing.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

             Cydonian Imperative: 05-03-01 - Pyramid on Phobos?

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 18:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 14:11:06 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 05-03-01 - Pyramid on Phobos?


The Cydonian Imperative
05-03-01

A Pyramid on Phobos?
by Mac Tonnies

Please see:

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html



[image]


The "monolith" discovered on Mars' moonlet Phobos appears
pyramid-like in this preliminary shape-from-shading rendering by
Chris Joseph.

As explored in earlier installments, Mars' moon Phobos features
some unexplained outcroppings, shown below.

[image]

Perhaps the most interesting of these is the tall feature
appropriately dubbed the "monolith" by its discoverer, Efrain
Palermo. Preliminary photoclinometric analysis by Chris Joseph
shows that the "monolith" may be pyramidal. Since Phobos is a
small, rounded body with no water or atmosphere to erode
features into interesting shapes, the presence of the pyramidal
monilith on Phobos is made doubly hard to explain.

[image]

Analysis of "monolith" by Efrain Palermo.

One prosaic option is that the pyradal outropping is a chunk of
debris that was blasted from Phobos by a meteor strike. But
Phobos' gravity is scant, and it's difficult to accept that a
shard of derbris would fail to achieve escape velocity.

-end-









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

             Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 17:08:19 +1200
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 14:28:56 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Sawers


 >Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 12:12:32 +1200 (NZST)
 >From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:19:32 CST
 >>Subject: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >Greetings List,

 >Chris Rutkowski wrote:

 >>While everyone is in a dither over Dennis Plunkett's announcment
 >>and subsequent media coverage of his closing of the British
 >>Flying Saucer Bureau, I should point out that this has a
 >>precedent.

 ><snip>

 >Here are my own notes and entry of my holdings of UFO
 >Publications:-

 >7. British Flying Saucer Bureau & Flying Saucer Club This Group
 >   is an amalgamation of two British Groups - The "Club" having
 >   been founded in 1952 and the "Bureau" in 1953 - amalgamation
 >   taking place in April, 1954.
 >
 >   A small newsletter "Flying Saucer News" was published from
 >   Winter, 1953/54 (last on file Autumn 1955)
 >
 >   A few newsletters appeared under the title "Flying Saucer
 >   News Bulletin" published by the "Bureau" at Bristol
 >   (February,1955 - last issue in file is Spring, 1956)
 >
 >   Nothing else is known about the group(s) and their publishing
 >   history
 >
 >   Holdings: Partial Set Held
 >
 >   -(The New Zealand Herald for Tuesday April 12th, 2001 quoting
 >   an AAP source - from the "Times", told of the closing of this
 >   group after nearly 50 years.)

 >So this group was indeed established in the early 1950's but
 >they must have eventually been only a small group )or possibly
 >only a one or two person activity.

 >Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
 >Voice : 64-9-6345285
 >Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand

Murray,

That wonderful library and files of yours are very comprehensive
indeed.

Thanks for the info.

Hope you are keeping well

William (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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                   Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 07:48:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 14:32:05 -0400
Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hatch


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:40:04 +0100

 >>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 05:57:23 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!

 >>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Source: TLC News

 >>>http://tlc.discovery.com/news/news.html

 >>>April 25 - The British Flying Saucer Bureau is closing after
 >>>chronicling UFO activities for nearly 50 years - because of a
 >>>sharp decline in the number of reported sightings.

 >>>The group, which once had 1,500 members worldwide, used to
 >>>receive at least 30 reports a week of sightings of unidentified
 >>>flying objects, but they had now virtually dried up, the Times
 >>>newspaper reported on Monday.

 >>Is there somebody in the UK that can sort this all out?

 >I would have done so a while ago but I have been off-line for a
 >week owing to illness at home.

 >>Ostensibly, we have this rather likeable sounding chap who is
 >>taking a well-earned retirement from UFO matters.

 >That pretty well sums it up. The BFSB was very much a small
 >local social club run by a few old stalwart Ufologists such as
 >Dennis who have not really been in the mainstream of Ufology for
 >a very long time. So they opted to call it a day. And I don't
 >blame them one bit if they felt it was time.
<snip>


Hello Jenny!

Well, you certainly have answered all my questions, and then
some! I'm glad that my original take on Plunkett and his group
wasn't too far off the mark. A likable old fellow, much like I
thought. Tossing a few in the local with some old cronies never
made anybody bad.

I can also understand the local and even national (British) news
coverage... perhaps as a human interest story. It got a bit out
of hand however, as soon as the news left your shores... French
waiters and American bellhops given the impression that Ufology
has folded its tent for lack of a subject.

Suppose a group of 10 aging chiropractors retire to Bermuda.
Will he hear that modern medicine has come to a halt for lack of
illness? I don't suppose so.

An easier assumption is that UFOs and their adherents are
treated as nut-cases by the international press. If some zany
religious cult were to throw in the towel, European and North
American press treatment might resemble the BSFB matter more
closely. That goes double on a slow-news day of course.



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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                  Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 08:02:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 15:40:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'? - Hatch


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:15:21 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 20:43:46 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:37:10 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Crash Test Dummies'?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>For example, the first known appearance of the story that the
 >>>Army threw a cordon around the site was Frank Edwards in 1955 or
 >>>56 in one of his popular saucer lectures. He said people could
 >>>find this info in old newspaper clippings. No one has ever found
 >>>such a newspaper report. The implication is clear: Edwards made
 >>>it up.

 >>>If one assumes that these are real events, then there had to be
 >>>a chronology from event to story. But if the story is only that,
 >>>well, who knows?

 >>I couldn't find anything like that without a place name or
 >>approx. date. There was nothing similar in three books by
 >>Edwards, and attributes searches for (Landing and Military) led
 >>nowhere.

 >>Can you (Bob) recall any other details to help track this one
 >>down?

 >Hi, Larry:

 >See my post last year about Frank Edward's role in apparently
 >generating several key parts of the "Roswell" tale:

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/dec/m30-014.shtml

Hello Bob:

This appears to be a misunderstanding on my part.

It appears that Edwards was referring to either the Roswell
incident, something much like it, or perhaps some distorted
version of one of Scully's tales.

The 1955-1956 time frame was not for any crash-case, but rather
the dates of Edwards' lectures, and the appearance of FSR Vol.1
#1 which mentioned a sketchy recollection of a radio broadcast.

I don't list UFO events by the date they were lectured about,
nor anybody's publishing date .. just the dates they purportedly
took place.   Thus the confusion.


Thanks

- 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                               An Odd Question

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 12:03:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 15:43:08 -0400
Subject: An Odd Question


Hi,

Here's a question that might seem odd.

Does anyone know if there is a connection between the US TV
drama series 'Judging Amy' and ufology?

It has recently started airing in the UK and I have spotted a
curious pattern that seems to tie it to MUFON. So far I have
noticed several names in the credits and incidental character
names that seem to coincidentally be akin to MUFON people. They
have had the names Boeche and Acuff, for example. And one of the
crew was even called Walt Andrus!

Maybe these names are more common in the US than in the UK and
this is merely serendipity but I wondered if there was a MUFON
connection with the production that was introducing these names
as a sort of subtle in joke?

I once discovered an amazing coincidence involving the Waltons
and ufology (yes - sad I know!) This has appeared in a letter
that I wrote to Fortean Times (even sadder!) and so I do keep an
eye out for these 'literary synchronocities'. But there may be a
simple explanation for this one.

I bet you thought after 'Frasier breaks the UFO cover up' this
list could not descend further into TV trivia.

I could tell you about the British TV sitcom that was all about
two ufologists who thought aliens ran the local fish and chip
shop, but someone might think it was really a true story told in
allegory (and this farce definitely was 'supposed' to be
funny)...


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                           Italian TV UFO Program

From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc <9a4ag@clarc.org>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 07:50:50 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:40:48 -0400
Subject: Italian TV UFO Program


Hello dear list members,

I have just received this e-mail report from one member of our
AGETI list. Report is translated into English for your use.

Giuliano

-----

From: Robert Buljevic <skeptic@s1c.org>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 22:21:20 +0200
Subject: [AGETI] RAI3 - Program On Ufology

Yesterday, 2nd May 2001 at about 11.45 a.m., the Italian TV
station RAI3 aired a program on ufology titled "Primo Piano". I
didn't watch the program from the start, only the last 15
minutes.

Anyway, there were two guests on the show: Alfredo Lissoni from
CUN (the Italian National Ufological Centre), and the director
of an italian science popularizing magazine, I think his name
was Piero Bianucci, who was skeptical about UFOs as
extraterrestrials.

Also, some short documentaries were featured in the program.

One was about an Alitalia pilot recounting a recent UFO sighting
while flying over northern Italy (he and his crew saw about 6
bright objects moving fast from left to right in front of his
plane; he contacted the air traffic control in Milan and in
Switzerland, but none of them reported a radar contact with the
objects). The other was about the Roswell incident.

Bianucci offered some natural explanations of the various UFO
sightings (meteorological phenomena, military planes, etc.)
Lissoni stressed that scientific investigation of UFOs is
required, but said that simplistic explanations cannot always
explain the phenomenon.

On the whole, I think the program was well balanced. Except that
the host didn't allow a direct discussion to develop. Each guest
was allowed to say what he thought, and that's it. There was no
lively discussion and polemic.

I don't know whether the program was pre-taped or was 'live'.


Robert Buljevic
http://www.prove-it.org


<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc                                  |
|   Ante Starchevicca 25/c, 23000 Zadar, Croatia, Europe        |
|   telephone: +385-23-24-06-14                                 |
|   ICQ UIN #66584465                                           |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Analytical Group for Extra-Terrestrial Information => AGETI |
|   AGETI founder http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag                   |
|   To subscribe to AGETI mailing list send a blank e-mail to:  |
|   ageti-subscribe@yahooGroups.com                             |
|   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ageti                         |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Author, Writer and Director of                              |
|   TV documentary series "THE CROATIAN X-FILES"                |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Writer of UFO column in Croatian magazine AURA              |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Radio station DONAT-FM, 97,2 Mhz WFM                        |
|   Obala kneza Branimira 12, 23000 Zadar, Croatia, Europe      |
|   telephone: +385-23-236-380                                  |
|   Fax:       +385-23-236-365                                  |
|   Author/Host of the radio program "THE UFO-X-FILES"          |
|   Cooperator of the radio program "UFOPORT" (Radio Rijeka)    |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                          Kean On Pilot Encounters

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:48:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:48:10 -0400
Subject: Kean On Pilot Encounters



Source: The Providence Journal

http://www.projo.com/cgi-bin/story.pl/opinion/05405261.htm

5.3.2001 00:05


Pilot Encounters With UFOs: Study Challenges Secrecy (And
Denial)


Leslie Kean
San Francisco

In January, Agence France Presse reported that a Siberian
airport was shut for 11/2 hours while a luminescent unidentified
flying object hovered above its runway. Although it's hard to
imagine such an event taking place in the industrialized United
States, a compelling October 2000 study by a retired aerospace
scientist from NASA-Ames Research Center shows that similar
incidents have occurred in American skies over the last 50
years. "Aviation Safety in America -- A Previously Neglected
Factor" presents more than 100 pilot and crew reports of
encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that appear
to have compromised aviation safety.

Author Richard F. Haines, formerly NASA's chief of the Space
Human Factors Office and a Raytheon contract scientist, is chief
scientist for the National Aviation Reporting Center on
Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), a research organization founded
last year. In stunning detail, pilots and crew describe a range
of geometric forms and lights inconsistent with known aircraft
or natural phenomena. Bizarre objects paced aircraft at
relatively near distances, sometimes disabling cockpit
instruments, interrupting ground communications, or distracting
the crew.

The data include 56 near-misses. Impulsive responses by pilots
to an approaching high-speed object can be hazardous; in a few
cases, such violent evasive reactions injured passengers and
flight attendants. However, Haines states that there is no
threat of a collision caused directly by UAPs "because of the
reported high degree of maneuverability shown by the UAP." While
flying over Lake Michigan in 1981, TWA Capt. Phil Schultz saw a
"large, round, silver metal object" with dark portholes equally
spaced around the circumference that "descended into the
atmosphere from above," according to his hand-written report.
Schultz and his first officer braced themselves for a mid-air
collision; the object suddenly made a high-speed turn and
departed.

Veteran Japan Airlines 747 Capt. Kenju Terauchi reported a
spectacular prolonged encounter over Alaska in 1986. "Most
unexpectedly, two space ships stopped in front of our face,
shooting off lights," he said. "The inside cockpit shined
brightly and I felt warm in the face." Despite the Federal
Aviation Administration's determination that he and his crew
were stable, competent and professional, he was grounded for
speaking out.

In 1997, a Swissair Boeing 747 over Long Island just missed a
glowing, white, cylindrical object speeding toward the plane.
According to an FAA Civil Aviation Security Office memorandum,
pilot Philip Bobet said that "if the object was any lower, it
may have hit the right wing."

Ground-systems operators have also been affected by UAP. "The
element of surprise means a decrease in safety because it
diverts the attention of air-traffic controllers that should be
focused on landing planes. That is a danger," says Jim
McClenahen, a recently retired FAA air-traffic-control
specialist and NARCAP technical adviser.

"Aviation Safety in America" does not attempt to explain the
origin of these mysterious objects. But Haines writes that
hundreds of reports, some dating back to the 1940s, "suggest
that they [UAPs] are associated with a very high degree of
intelligence, deliberate flight control, and advanced energy
management."

In the 1950s, pilots and crews reported seeing flying discs,
cigar-shaped craft with portholes, and gyrating lights, all with
extraordinary technical capabilities. Documents show the
unexplained objects were considered a national security concern.
By order of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, commercial pilots were
required to report sightings and the unauthorized release of a
UFO report could cost them 10 years in prison or a $10,000 fine.

To keep this information from the public, officials ridiculed
and debunked legitimate sightings, angering some pilots.
According to the Newark Star Ledger in 1958, more than 50
commercial pilots who had reported sightings, each with at least
15 years of major airline experience, blasted the policy of
censorship and denial as "bordering on the absolutely
ridiculous."

These pilots said they were interrogated by the Air Force,
sometimes all night long, and then "treated like incompetents
and told to keep quiet," according to one pilot. "The Air Force
tells you that the thing that paced your plane for 15 minutes
was a mirage or a bolt of lightening," he told the Star-Ledger.
"Nuts to that. Who needs it?" As a result, many pilots "forget"
to report their sightings at all, one pilot said.

According to a 1952 Air Force Status Report on UFOs for the Air
Technical Intelligence Center, pilots were so humiliated that
one told investigators, "If a space ship flew wing-tip to
wing-tip formation with me, I would not report it." The vast
majority of sightings by American pilots are still not reported.
The media perpetuate the censorship and ridicule, handicapping
the collection of valuable data.

In contrast, other countries are openly investigating the impact
of UAP on aviation safety. A 1999 French study by retired
generals from the French Institute of Higher Studies for
National Defense and a government agency with the National
Center for Space Studies examined hundreds of well-documented
pilot reports from around the world. The study could not explain
a 1994 Air France viewing of a UAP that instantaneously
disappeared as confirmed by radar and a 1995 Aerolineas
Argentinas Boeing 727 encounter with a luminous object that
extinguished airport lights as the plane attempted to land.

"Aeronautic personnel must be sensitized and prepared to deal
with the situation," the report states. They must first "accept
the possibility of the presence of extraterrestrial craft in our
sky." Then, "it is necessary to overcome the fear of ridicule."

In 1997, the Chilean government formed the Committee for the
Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena (CEFAA) following publicly
acknowledged observations of unidentified flying objects at a
remote Chilean airport. Both the French group and Gen. Ricardo
Bermudez Sanhuesa, president of the CEFAA, have made overtures
to the U.S. government for cooperation on this issue, with no
response. General Bermudez, and Air Force Gen. Denis Letty,
chairman of the French group, said in recent interviews that the
Haines study has international significance and should be taken
seriously.

Brian E. Smith, current head of the Aviation Safety Program at
NASA-Ames, agrees. "There is objective evidence in pilot reports
of unexplained events that may affect the safety of the
aircraft, " he says. "Yet getting people to take an objective
look at this subject is sometimes like pulling teeth." Indeed,
the Airline Pilots Association, our largest pilots union, and
the Flight Safety Foundation, describing itself as "offering an
objective view of aviation safety developments," ignored NARCAP
requests for a response to the study. In recent phone interviews
with this reporter, representatives dismissed the report out of
hand after glancing at the executive summary.

However, such dismissals may soon lose ground. Next Wednesday,
John Callahan, former division chief of the Accidents and
Investigations Branch of the FAA, will disclose FAA
documentation and subsequent CIA suppression of the Terauchi
encounter over Alaska. Callahan will be joined by more than 20
other government and military witnesses, and dozens more on
videotape, at a National Press Club briefing to challenge
official secrecy about this subject.

Retired United Airlines Capt. Neil Daniels, whose DC-10 was
forced into a left turn because of magnetic interference of
cockpit compasses by a brilliant UAP, is among the many who want
change. "The energies out there are absolutely profound," he
says. "I think we need to know what they are."


Leslie Kean is a journalist and author in the San Francisco Bay
area. (lkean@ix.netcom.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                    Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:21:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:50:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:36:23 -0500

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:56:05 -0400

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:34:30 -0000

<snip>

 >>>As someone who knew and interacted with Menzel (he once gave me
 >>>a flying saucer tie!), you seem to be somewhat unaware of his
 >>>history of utterly unscientific behavior in regard to UFOs. Here
 >>>was a man, nominally a scientist, who acted as anything but.
 >>>Yet, he was profoundly influential in waving other scientists
 >>>and important people off of the UFO subject because Harvard
 >>>Observatory was attached to his name. He richly deserves to be a
 >>>"villain" from the perspective of those of us who take UFO
 >>>reports serious.

 >>Menzel probably only represented the opinions of his fellow
 >>scientists regarding UFOs. I bet he would have lost his
 >>reputation and credibility if he had expressed different views.

 >I am certain that Dick is right, Serge wrong. Menzel was more a
 >shaper of views than a mouthpiece for them. At the time he was
 >an enormously powerful figure in American science, with all
 >sorts of professional and official connections, in a position to
 >make life difficult for scientists who took issue with him not
 >only on UFOs but on scientific matters generally (an aspect of
 >his personality interestingly discussed in Astronomy Now,
 >December 1992). Allen Hynek, who knew him for many years, often
 >(in private conversation) described Menzel as having the
 >personality of a bully.

<snip>

Menzel's attitude should be severely criticized, especially in
view of the position he had in the scientific community.

But should we demonize the figure and absolve his followers?

In the end, I believe the individual is (should be?) the master
of his mind. Of course, one should cannot dismiss exterior
influences, but isn't independent thought part of growing up?

Who should be held responsible for the general perception of
scientists towards the subject of UFOs? Guys like Menzel and
Klass? Or the people that blindly and uncritically support their
views?

Why did the McDonalds and the Hyneks fail?

WHy did the Menzels and the Klasses succeed?

This may be a tale of human pettiness.


Regards








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:39:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:51:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee



 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100


 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >>From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

<snip>

 >As for what's in it for me - that's a good question, I guess
 >that like RV Jones, I'm fascinated by this subject not because
 >of an interest in UFOs per se, whether they exist or not, I have
 >no emotional investment in that at all because I haven't got a
 >clue - I'm simply interested in _why_ people believe they exist,
 >and the lengths they will go to pursuade and in some cases,
 >browbeat, others into adopting their questionable conclusions.>

 >More specifically, in a cultural context, I'm interested in why
 >people believe UFOs exist at this point in history, and why they
 >are piloted by ETs.

Some/many people accept the conclusion (I hesitate to use the
"b" word) that at least the sightings of TRUFOs (UFO sightings
after investigation has removed the explainable ones) seem
indicative of non-human intelligence (NHI) which MIGHT be ET.
Why is this so? Because there are sightings which are (a) not
explainable in conventional terms and because (b) at least some
of these unexplainable sightings include descriptions of
objects/flying craft (AFC - Alien Flying Craft) that are not
products of humanity.

The correct, scientific stance of the skeptic should be that (b)
is not true because (a) is not true, i.e., there are no ETs
(time travelers, denizens of the inner earth or whatever)
because there are no unexplainable sightings. IN making this
argument the skeptic should be prepared to offer convincing
explanations for the sightings which ufologists have labelled
TRUFOs. Not only offer explanations, but be willing and able to
defend the explanations. You have seen this process ongoing with
respect to the "pelicanization" of the Arnold case. There have
been a bunch of explanations proposed by the "experts" in past
years and, as far as Easton is concerned, all other explanations
pale before his pelican explanation. However, there are those on
this list (raise your hands and prepare to be counted!) who dare
argue that the pelican explanation is not a convincing
explanation. (draw a map, prove there are aluminzed pelicans,
etc.) For those daredevils the suggestion that what Arnold saw
are ET craft makes some sense. That's not to say it is PROVEN
ET, but at least they weren't made by mankind.

So, if you want to know why some people believe (oooops!) in
UFOs and ETs at the present time, go back in history and find
out what happened 50 or more years ago when the "tradition" of
ufology was set by the Air Force, which proclaimed that all
sightings could be explained and there was no evidence of
something we didn't understand (etc.) and yet, analysis of the
explanations show that they fail. (Oddly enough, it was
primarily the scientific community that believed the air force
explanations, the very community that could have refuted the
explanations. Why did they BELIEVE the Air FOrce was telling the
truth? Because the best information was held by the Air Force,
because no research papers were published on flying saucer
sightings in refereed journals, and at least in part because
famous scientists such a Menzel stated that there were no such
things as flying saucers and that all sightings not hoaxes were
misidentifications. This lack of good data made sense to the
scientific community that didn't BELIEVE that ETs would be
coming here to earth because there was no theoretcal reason for
it and the only theory (ET ) involved space travel over very
long distances, and so on.

On the other hand, those who did look into the UFO sightings
more carefully also established a tradition: that (a) there are
unexplained sightings and (b) at least some of those indicate
NHI.

I guess the bottom line is that if all credible sightings had
been explainable in conventional terms 50 years ago, we wouldn't
be even discussing this situation now.

 >It seems that when one tries to study UFOlogy and one inevitably
 >has to interact with its proponents, it becomes apparent after a
 >short while that one is not allowed to approach the subject in
 >an objective way but is forced to take sides and argue a
 >position - because there is so much emotion and belief invested
 >in the subject by so many.

 >The reasons why this should be the case are worthy of study in
 >themselves - and indeed there a few sociologists and folklorists
 >who have made attempts at studying motivations and belief
 >systems held by UFOlogists.

It is difficult to walk the fine line between the two
"traditions" (all sightings explainable vs some not explainable)
without getting vociferous arguments from whichever side you are
discussing. Hard nosed skeptics/scoffers/debunkers find it
unbelieveably illogical to BELIEVE that there could be any
sightings that couldn't be explained in conventional terms.
Their ultimate resort is that "there will be unexplained
sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
not enough information to form a conclusion." To this the
skeptics from the other side argue that there are sightings
which have more than enough credible information for explanation
or identification, but the information in the sighting report
contradicts all conventional explanations.

And, it would seem, never the twain shall meet!

Without unexplained cases there would be no ufology as we know
it now. (There might be "ufology" based on hte paranormal or
visions reported by cultists and religionists, etc. I, for one,
would not be interested in that sort of ufology.)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                            PRG Update - 05-04-01

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:07:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:59:06 -0400
Subject: PRG Update - 05-04-01


PRG
Paradigm Research Group

Update - May 4, 2001

Leslie Kean Article

A new article has been published by investigative journalist,
Leslie Kean. It is about the implications of pilot sightings and
is published in the Providence Journal. Distribution to a wire
service is likely.

Last year Leslie Kean published articles on the French COMETA
report in several papers.

You may review this important work at:
www.projo.com/opinion/commentary.htm


Space Based Weapons

The main headline for the front page of the Wednesday, May 2
Washington Times was as follows:

"Bush favors space-based arms for missile defense"

A new push for SDI (Stars Wars) weaponry is now gathering force
within the executive branch. This is in addition to the ABM
systems proposals.  All interested parties should be paying very
close attention to these renewed SDI efforts.  There is some
political risk here. Why is it being taken? In fact, these
policy proposals do not make much sense in lieu of real world,
terrestrial concerns.

Current speculation is that the administration is considering a
45% increase in defense spending. For what reason and against
what enemy?

There have been a number of maneuvers recently, including
release of previously classified documents, which have a deck
clearing quality to them. Clearing the decks for what?


The Disclosure Project

Final preparations for the May 9th press conference are underway
and the event shows every sign of meeting or exceeding
expectations.

Project Director Dr. Stephen Greer will appear on the Art Bell
radio show [www.artbell.com] on Friday evening, May 4. He will
provide an update and tell how listeners can help the press
conference and subsequent events have the greatest possible
impact.

Further information at: www.disclosureproject.org


PRG Media Schedule for Stephen Bassett

Friday, May 4, 10 pm EDT
  Webcast - www.jerrypippin.com - Jerry Pippin Show
(with Jim Hickman)

Saturday, May 5, 8:00 am or 8:30 am EDT
  Washington - WMAL AM 630 - David Burd Show
  Webcast - www.wmal.com/listenlive.asp

Saturday, May 12, 8 pm to 11pm EDT
  San Antonio - KTSA AM 550 - Jack Landman Show
  Webcast - temporarily suspended

Pending (Sometime between May 4 and May 9)
Washington, DC - WMAL AM 630 - Victoria Jones Show
(with Dr. Steven Greer)
  Webcast - www.wmal.com/listenlive.asp


*****************************************************************
            Paradigm Research Group
           URL: www.paradigmclock.com
           E-mail: ParadigmRG@aol.com
              Phone: 301-990-4290
               Fax: 301-990-0199
            4938 Hampden Lane, #161
            Bethesda, Maryland 20814
__________________________________________________

Spread the word about X-PPAC & the politics of disclosure.
   Contribute online at: www.x-ppac.org/Financial.html
or mail to: 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, MD 20814
__________________________________________________

    "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
        if you are willing to give away the credit."
__________________________________________________








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 4

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:05:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 17:01:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 19:20:41 +0100


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500


Dr. Dave,

 >>What is it with debunkers that they just can't let go of one of
 >>their own, however odious? Aren't the rest of you glad you
 >>aren't one of them? And why is it that Dave Clarke can't bring
 >>himself to respond to Bruce Maccabee's clear and specific
 >>criticisms of Menzel's methodology, preferring instead to turn
 >>the usual tired pelicanist ad hominems on those aggravatingly
 >>cheeky, iconoclastic ufologists? That's a rhetorical question,
 >>by the way.

 >This was exactly as I expected - there you go playing to the
 >crowd again. First I get harried by the Sandows and Ledgers,
 >then they bring up the big guns, Jerry Clark and Bruce Maccabee
 >no less - lordy, I am not worthy.

What a cheap shot. It guess it's easier to employ dopey sarcasm
than to address the quite specific points we raised about
Menzel's failings. I guess this is your way of conceding the
obvious: that your postings were poorly considered and not
defensible. Or, to paraphrase a line from an old blues, your
mind was on vacation while your fingers were working overtime.

 >Cue the Ufological choir - Ed Stewart was so, so, right.

Your fingers are still busy, I see. What you mistake for a
choir, of course, is rather more likely a single voice inside
your head, warning you that incredible as it may seem, the ever
confident, ever condescending Dr. David Clarke may be wrong.
Maybe very wrong.

 >To echo something Jerry once said, some of us have real lives to
 >live (those who aren't connected to the Internet 24 hours each
 >day) and I have more important priorities than responding to
 >Bruce Maccabee's "clear and specific criticisms" of Donald
 >Menzel.

Then don't elect instead to insult those of us who, unlike you,
have gone to the trouble of learning something about Menzel. The
alternative to not addressing actual facts and points of view is
simply to say nothing at all about them. Insulting the messenger
while ignoring the message is _not_ - pelicanist doctrine
notwithstanding - an acceptable alternative.

 >It was never my intention to 'defend' Menzel, only to observe
 >the reaction of the ufological elite to the mere mention of his
 >name - plenty of food for thought there, and so little effort
to >obtain a satisfying meal.

What moonshine. What you object to, of course, is _any_
criticism of Menzel. If we were to wait for pelicanists to do
anything beyond quoting him approvingly, we would all turn into
fossils on our way to collapsing into dust prior to the death of
the universe from old age.

And what's this "ufological elite" crap, besides particularly
mean-spirited and meaningless insult? I am a part of no elite
(the very notion would put anyone who knows me on the floor in a
fit of helpless, possibly life-threatening hilarity), and I know
no one on this list who is. Well, maybe Greg Sandow, who is a
very highly regarded music critic, regularly published in
prestigious magazines, journals, and newspapers, and thus
arguably a member of an elite, though one that has nothing to do
with UFOs.

But "ufological elite" is an oxymoron if ever I heard one; it's
equivalent to being Grand Emperor of the frog pond back of the
back forty. Or maybe I'm taking you too seriously. Maybe all
you're doing is scraping the bottom of the polemical barrel with
a pelican's wing, which must be exceedingly difficult. In that
case, you have my sympathies.

 >you can safely turn to the choir and tell them that
 >dastardly Menzel-loving debunker, the evil Dr Clarke, has not
 >responded therefore you have won the argument... (heard that
 >one before somewhere?)

"Evil"? "Dastardly"? Ah, those tireless fingers. How about
something simpler and less melodramatic, like a guy who can't
get his mouth and his facts lined up?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:05:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen


 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:14:57 -0400
 >From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"

Dear Kelly, EBK and Listers,

Normally, I wouldn't respond to this type of post. However, much
of the posted article had to do with Guy Malone's ministry and
his perception of ETs as "fallen angels", and your perception,
Kelly, of ETs as "spirits". You may both be correct. I think
not.

 >...says Malone. "All I remember is that there are several instances
 >in my childhood that were very scary in some instances in which
 >I was visited or taken by other beings. When I was 20 I owned up
 >to the fact."

Note: "All I remember..." If Guy Malone cannot consciously
recall _most_ of what happened to him during his abductions, I
don't think he should be trusted as to his conclusions about
same, do you? And, I can assure you, "spirits" don't burn holes
through flesh to the bone with laser beams, Kelly. I have the
proof. I bear the scars.

Don't you think that those of us who have been experiencers have
asked similar questions of our abductors? No one wants to hear
the answers, because as John Velez mentioned, the answers don't
fit most peoples' preconceived ideas about what or how we think
aliens should act or behave.

It does no good to assume that what you experience(d) as an
abductee is innately evil. The beings are _not_ perfect, no more
than "we" are perfect. What you assume when you assume "they"
should act thus-and-so, is to voice your wish that these beings
(because they are technologically superior) must _also_ meet
your need for perfection emotioanlly and psychologically (i.e.
act as gods: be consistently loving, kind, giving, honest,
positively intervening, etc.). Otherwise they would not behave
inconsistently, would not lie, would not hurt you, would not
rape, would not fail to intervene when needed, etc. In other
words, they would _not_ act human.

Despite what Guy Malone thinks, "they" do not profess to be
gods, and they do not call us gods. They do not believe Jesus is
the Son of God, nor do they understand the Trinity... Father,
Son and Holy Ghost. But, they do believe in an Almighty Creator
of the Universe (not them and not us), and quote; "We value
life, all life."

They _are_ concerned that we perceive them with respect, not
reverance, and that we understand we are special to them and to
the well-being of the universe. How, I have no idea. Your guess
is as good as mine. Why me? I don't know, and frankly, I don't
give a _hit why. Whatever their motives for abducting me, unless
they give back to me some measure of what they have taken, I'll
never be able to forgive them. God can do that if He wants to
when they die. They aren't perfect. Period. Remember that. They
do care deeply. Remember that. They are not innately evil, but
they may appear to be just as "fallen" as we are. Know that.


Sincerely, Sue










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:17:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:07:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 18:07:37 -0300


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:25:58 +0100

 >>>>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 00:15:07 -0400
 >>>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:59:19 +


Stan and listfolk,

 >>Beyond that, consider this assessment of the man from a fellow
 >>astronomer and noncombatant in the UFO wars:

 >>"Menzel led a double life. The crusty astronomer was a
 >>high-ranking agent of the National Security Agency..... He used
 >>his position to blacken the reputations and damage the careers
 >>of scientific opponents, produced fake research supporting his
 >>masters, [and] betrayed his president [Eisenhower]..... The
 >>seediest part of his career began in 1960. Menzel - still a
 >>serving [intelligence] officer - offered to supply presidential
 >>candidate John F. Kennedy with secret data on intelligence
 >>activity during Ike's administration..... The files now reveal a
 >>sordid stack of letters to JFK, abusing rivals and supposed
 >>friends, and urging positions of authority be given to the
 >>selfless Menzel. Many were." (Ian Seymour, in Astronomy Now,
 >>December 1992)

 >I had seen this piece years ago and am convinced it is a vicious
 >and massive misrepresentation of the data in my Jan/Feb. 1988
 >International UFO Reporter Article 'The Secret Life of Donald H.
 >Menzel',

I was responsible for getting this very interesting article
published in IUR 13 years ago... my, time does fly whether
you're having fun or not. I would be very much surprised if Ian
Seymour based his article on Stan's piece, or if he was even
aware of its existence. IUR had and has a very small
circulation.

 >Menzel also gave his frank assessment of Detlev Bronk and Hug
 >Drydenon Dec. 27, 1960... after the presidential election. There
 >is no treason here. Menzel had also noted that he had written a
 >report about the NSA for the Ike administration. There is no
 >sign of treason.

I don't recall seeing the accusation of "treason" in the
discussion till now. Menzel's critics have accused him of shoddy
behavior and lousy science, neither failing synonymous with
treason. If anyone has charged him with being a traitor, I have
yet to hear it.

Stan is an old and valued friend, and I mean no offense when I
say I consider it ironic, to say the least, that, in defending
Menzel, he has allied himself with persons with whom ordinarily
he has not a thing in common.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Serious Research - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 13:26:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:08:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Salvaille


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >>someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >>original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >>unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >>show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >>necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >>more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

 >No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
 >craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
 >this semantical game. You can falsify my hypothesis by offering
 >convincing prosaic or mundane explanations for "my" 18 cases.
 >You are off to a very poor start.

 >So far you have appealed to authority to wipe out the Coyne and
 >Cash-Landrum cases, without offering any reasonable explanations
 >and without addressing the salient features of the cases. And
 >you have stated that Venus is a reasonable explanation for the
 >Ravenna case, although that is entirely counter-to-fact. If you
 >really believe that rather incredible hypothesis, then it is
 >incumbent upon you to explain the features of the case that I
 >have cited above.

<snip>

What did you expect? Do you think a skeptic would be a skeptic
if he had done some minimal research on the subject of UFOs with
minimal scientific reasoning?

Whatever. One will find no Saint Paul on the road of skepticism.

Regards










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

              Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 21:06:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:13:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? - Bolton


 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 20:17:22 -0700
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >I'm not aware of such cases, David. Can you send me a reference?
 >In Ian Stevenson's 1500 or so solved pastlife cases, this hasn't
 >occurred, though once or twice there was an uncertainty of a few
 >months due to uncertain birth date (Indian cases, I think they
 >were).

I got them from a lecture by Prof. Archie Roy (SPR) of about 5
years ago. As far as I can recall they were ongoing
investigations and had not been fully written up at that time.
I'll have a bit of a dig around - as I'd like to read the
finished reports myself - and forward the references when I find
them. Interestingly, these _were_ cases from India.

 >>Some of these cases seem to involve an actual "personailty
 >>switch", whereby the personality of the dead person overrides
 >>that of the "recipient" on a sporadic or even permanent basis.

 >That's usually called "possession." The New Testament Gospels
 >have a lot of that.

Hehe ;-) Yes - but as these were from a Hindu culture the view
of friends and relatives of was somewhat different.


David G Bolton

<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #348

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 16:48:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:15:28 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #348


Apology to MW #348 (For May 4, 2001)

Illinois's a placid state for folks that know their place?
They've "jobs, and crops, and families" to keep their lives in
trace. They've got to "make a living" (keep the wolves from
worried doors?), and they've got to be pragmatic. So, they need
not know the score?

Stuff can fly their nighttime skies, and they won't care a wit?
Blaming 'jobs' or 'farms' and 'weather', they blame 'family' and
'thrift'? Rather, giving up completely to the DICTATES of their
day, when it is in FACT those dictates that subvert and make
them pay!

Illinois hosts UFOs that grapple with the plan. They fly aloft,
huge arrowheads, like buildings, understand? And all lit up with
beacons from their corners all aglow, they shimmer with a
crimson light that pulsates down below. They waft along
majestically, bereft of any stealth. They make themselves
available for inspections of oneself? They rattle chains of
status quo -- indifferent to denial that is issued forth from
pundits of the dictate's daily trial.

It's like a big pink elephant, but one that's REALLY seen. How
could one report that fact to be, then, not believed? How does
one belie the tale that's traced out in the night by so many
trusted people who communicate this sight? The eerily anomalous
DID fly northeastern skies, and 911 was called upon by sober men
who tried. The cops dispatched would see it too, and photos they
were making... were hard to see and indistinct but minus any
faking. Philip Klass was quick to spew that it was only Venus,
but scholarship would blow that off as thinking that demeans us.

Four towns of cops would see this thing that flew without a
sound, that blocked out all the planets and the stars Phil
thought profound. Professionals of diverse types, from teachers
up through truckers were witnesses to strange events that charm
and reconstruct us. The craft was huge but danced the sky and
spun upon its axis. Devoid of any commonness, it did nothing to
relax us. And lit up like a Christmas tree it sped up now and
then to 'shoot' to the horizon, trained observers tell us,
friend.

Real towns in Illinois report this UFO: Lebanon and Shiloh and
Dupo, don't you know. And yet the word did NOT go out, events
were just ignored, and we are left to wonder what credulity
implores! Once again authorities have proved they've missed the
boat. Once again they demonstrate they'd rather sink then float.
Once again they demonstrate the courage of our race to a
plethora of visitors that we're too dumb too face! Once again we
lose out on the living, breathing stars that conjures life among
them and then sends it near and far.

And still they sneer and chuckle like it's 'us' that has no
clue, when the world is in RENAISSANCE and potential's bright
and new. Worldwide we come alive and cop to where we are: a tiny
globe off beaten paths but shining like a star. Stanton Friedman
makes the case that folks more near than far have cluttered our
real history and might hint our higher bar. That we aspire to
it, like our struggle of the past -- to free ourselves from
priests and kings that strangle us at last. To be free of all
their ad-men -- manipulations they contrive... to sell a short
term world view that we can't or won't survive!

So what about that NON-EVENT going down in Illinois? Why don't
we hear the furor of some people making noise? Why don't they
make DEMANDS of them that makes demands of us while they
squander our inheritance and betray the future's trust? Why ARE
we less than knowledgeable, why would we just deny... what
people who are good and true have reported in their skies? Why
would these honest people, who have everything to lose... why
would they, then, report these things that hover into view?

Something flew in Illinois. That, at least, is clear. Mainstream
bland indifference should be blamed. It's THEM to sell out --
hear? It could not be a stealth-craft of the type to spy on us,
or why in hell'd they advertise, and light the damn thing up?!
The thing that was reported was just too damn big to make, and
suggesting that it's Venus just communicates Phil's fake. So,
why the hell ignore it and be something less than free? Do
hapless folks in Illinois just like it on their knees?

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Humanity secures another victory for those with dirt in their
hair. The dirt comes from the reflexive move to shove ones head
in the ground at the first sign of the paradigm changing
inconvenient and irascibly inexplicable. Christ, but we're like
a baby that won't leave the womb. What are the distractions of
family, farm, and job really distracting us from when the family
is an invention of this century, the farm is being phased out
for the monolithic agro monopoly (in the interests of efficiency
of course, an efficiency made necessary by a population so
stupidly doubling every twenty years or so), and the job is
generally a nonproductive futility that contributes to the
general environmental disintegration. Better to cop to the
obvious reality of UFOs and try to get an idea of what they seem
to be so furiously pointing at.

Honestly, are we doomed to live harrowing _real_ lives beyond
the imagined terrors of the ignored alien visitation? Are we
doomed to be led to society's self-righteous slaughter by the
hyper-privileged few who feel they have the divine right to
profit from the exertions of the talented deluded... destroying
the home of those deluded in the process.

If those few that profit from these deluded feel compelled to
protest, well... it may be that their protest is fueled more by
justified LOSS of prestige and position enjoyed unjustly for too
many years, than for the sensitivities and sensibilities of
those that produce the prestige and position _for_ them. I pause
for a sneer of my own. In other words, it's not to our aggregate
benefit that these protests (and denials) are ever (and have
ever been) made. Certainly we're better off knowing truth,
presently completely denied us, whatever the price or
consequence. We do ourselves no favors by hiding from what most
of the hyper educated propeller heads ADMIT is out there...
somewhere. And if 'they' are somewhere, they could be
'anywhere', and that means most certainly even HERE. What
happened in Illinois on January 5th last year?

Somebody knows.



~~~~ EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros
URL. http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                    Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 17:52:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 08:20:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - Velez


 >Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:48:10 -0400
 >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Keen On Pilot Encounters


 >Source: The Providence Journal

 >http://www.projo.com/cgi-bin/story.pl/opinion/05405261.htm

 >5.3.2001 00:05

 >Pilot Encounters With UFOs: Study Challenges Secrecy (And
 >Denial)

 >Leslie Kean
 >San Francisco

 >In January, Agence France Presse reported that a Siberian
 >airport was shut for 11/2 hours while a luminescent unidentified
 >flying object hovered above its runway. Although it's hard to
 >imagine such an event taking place in the industrialized United
 >States, a compelling October 2000 study by a retired aerospace
 >scientist from NASA-Ames Research Center shows that similar
 >incidents have occurred in American skies over the last 50
 >years. "Aviation Safety in America -- A Previously Neglected
 >Factor" presents more than 100 pilot and crew reports of
 >encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that appear
 >to have compromised aviation safety.

Yeah! This is the _stuff_ baby!

As any "New Yorker" might shout out (while pointing to his crotch,)

..."Debunk this!"  <LOL>

Whenever I'm asked about 'evidence' for the existence of UFOs
one of the things I like to offer in response are all the pilot
reports that have been gathered over the years.

In this compilation of reports you have the eyewitness testimony
of veteran pilots, their crews, as well as from ground support
personnel. It doesn't get any more 'rock solid' (in terms of
witness credibility and expertise) than it does with this
subgroup of UFO reports and reporters.

As far as I'm concerned, these guys (pilots) _are_ the "experts"
when it comes to knowing the contents of the sky. If so many
veteran pilots all tell you they are seeing silver discs and
assorted and sundry shaped other (unknown) aircraft up there,
you can safely bet the farm that there are 'unknowns' flying
around in our skies. That's the kind of testimony we should all
give 'heavy weight' to. Shoot, I'd be willing to take so many
experienced men at their word. But that's not the world we live
in.

These reports, as 'stand alone's', should be enough to convince
the hardest sceptic that there is 'something' (not ours) in our
skies. I consider it a deep disrespect of these men and women
that their collective 'word' can be so easily called into
question by _armchair_ critics of the phenomenon.

Pelicans my a**.

The real mind-blower is; if so few pilots are willing to report
UFO encounters for fear of job related hassles, imagine how many
sightings go unrecorded! The skies must be teeming with UFOs.
Maybe even enough to account for all the abduction reports.
<VBEG>

The 'word' alone of these many professionals, (good, honorable
men and women when taken as a group) is 'good enough' for me,
any day. ;)

We've been _told_. We've got UFOs up dere people! We have to
begin to band together at some point and demand 'en masse' from
our respective governments that we be told the truth regarding
the UFOs. Maybe we ought to launch an expanded 'worldwide'
version of the Roswell petition and present our respective
government leaders with signed petitions from the "People of the
whole World."

I recall an old 60's rant that went like so,...

"The People, united, can never be defeated."

Regards,

John Velez

                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                  Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 16:38:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 10:07:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics? -


 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 14:32:07 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?
 >>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 20:35:06 -0600

 >>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>To: <02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :>
 >>>Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 4:59 PM
 >>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Abductions, The Brain And Genetics?

 >>>>Source: MSNBC
 >>>http://www.msnbc.com/news/566079.asp?cp1=1
 >>>Mystic Visions Or Brain Circuits At Work?
 >>>Religion And The Brain

 >>>In the new field of 'neurotheology', scientists seek the
 >>>biological basis of spirituality. Is God all in our heads?
 >>>By Sharon Begley
 >>>NEWSWEEK

Dear John V., Bill H., Dick H., Jim D., Bobbie F., and Listers,

Thank you _all_ for your responses.

I am not offended by the "new-age" bent of some of the ideas put
forth. OBEs and NDEs are all pleasantly familiar experiences for
me, so I do not find talking about them uncomfortable. I am not
afraid to die anymore. But, because the abduction experiences
nearly always contain more negative than positive choreographed
events, some involving physical pain, I find talking about them
much more uncomfortable. Reincarnation has been mentioned to me
by "them" and I found it so distressing that I have forgotten
much of what I was told and shown about it... "souls in drawers"
rings a bell. I have avoided reading or studying much about such
theories, as I found it too threatening, as if reading about
such a theory (about "souls in drawers") would make it more
plausible.

I was on my way to the library when I got snowed-in. Thank you
again for the thorough bibliography and for your thoughtful
responses. I'm not alone, and I know that. It makes a whole lot
of difference. Hopefully, the library will have _some_ of the
titles you mentioned.

John V., I know that you weren't offended by the religious
implications of this article. Probably because you're better
educated than I about such matters. I was. (offended). I
consider thoughtless (lacking critical thinking skills) those
whose writing espouse a "simple" (lumping) biological cause or
religious basis for the phenomena we discuss here. There isn't
anything "simple" about this.

Such drivel, as proposed by Menzel, Klass, Greer, Persinger and
Malone, when couched in scientific or religious authority, tend
to lend credence to their beliefs (because that _is_ what they
are... beliefs without substantial proof). Do I sound like a
skeptibunker yet? I hope so. How does the shoe fit? Just fine,
thank you.

Personally, I find their work so lacking in basic information as
to be judged thusly: A + B = Z. In other words, what little
information they do manage to glean from their experiences
and/or lab work results in quantum leaps in judgment, and
therefore, most probably, erroneous conclusions. I find it
maddeningly stupid and "strange" behavior for highly educated
individuals to behave so irrationally. I throw most of their
work in with "swamp gas," "Venus rising," "Religious Fervor,"
and any other "elitist" explanations that come crawling out of
the woodwork, including government/military disinformation &
cover-up. Pleez. Just because I am an abductee, doesn't mean I
cannot differentiate between rational and irrational thinking
and behavior in others.

I am not that fragile.


Sue








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                         Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 10:10:16 -0400
Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...


Weird Whirlpool

http://www.kfmb.com/special_assignment/archive/2001/04/weird.php

I think Jan brought this subject up on UpDates, to which I had
responded.

...and, no, I don't think this has anything to do with any
actual 'UFOs', although they are mentioned throughout the
newscast, including an interview with one 'UFO expert' or
someone who says it's "definitely a possibility" that it's a
UFO. Whatever.....

FWIW, Greer is on Bell tonight.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                    Re: Disclosure Project Press Release

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 01:44:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 10:19:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release


Regarding:

 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:55:30 -0000

Richard Hall wrote:

 >The pseudoscience of alleged 'alien implants' and Roswell
 >artifacts is not merely the work of ignoramuses or people with
 >axes to grind, it all too conveniently discredits the entire
 >effort to bring serious attention to UFOs. Naive and gullible
 >'ufologists' (especially those seeking to become major players)
 >are extremely vulnerable to this kind of manipulation.

Richard,

If I may correct that obvious 'faux pas', doubtless you meant to
say, "Naive and gullible 'ufologists' (especially those seeking
to become major players) are extremely vulnerable to this kind of
manipulation".

Of course, if there were in truth any so-called 'major players',
they are responsible for, as we all recognise, or in John Velez's
words, "Right now ufology has no real credibility".

'Major players'....?

Richard... who are they and how can 'ufology' distance itself
from them?

Is ridicule a lifetime's 'achievement'?


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Robert Gates RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 00:21:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 10:46:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook


Don Wrote:

 >I've yet to see one debunker back away from an obviously flawed
 >explanation to a sighting, while I've seen many older UFO cases
 >dusted off and declared not worth considering further by UFO
 >investigators. Debunkers on the other hand seem to want to hold
 >their lines at all costs - including their credibility.


Hi Don,

An excellent point. Debunkers don't back away from any obviously
flawed explaination. You will never hear a debunker say words
like "Gosh, my original explaination was totally full of crap
and I misinterpreted the evidence..." or something like that.
What you hear from the debunkers is they float a new
explaination all the while babbling about how this fits the case
better, etc etc.

Debunkers haven't changed since the early days and I suspect it
is very likely that all modern day debunkers do is replow ground
already plowed by Menzel et all to some degree or another.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                   Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 15:14:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:28:49 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain - Hatch


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca,
 >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:14:09 -0400
 >Subject: Spain: UFO CE-II in Granada

 >SOURCE: Sociedad de Investigaciones Biofisicas (SIB-Betelgeuse)

 >DATE: April 29, 2001

 >Date: April 13, 2001

 >Time: 08:30 hrs

 >Place: Finca Buenavista, vicinity of Cortijo de La Polilla.
 >Municipality of Alhama de Granada.

 >Witness: Jesus Maldonado, approximately 40 years old. Single.
 >Tractor driver (on an hourly basis, working for the owners of a
 >number of farms).
<snip>

 >##################
 >Translation (C) 2001. S. Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU).
 >Special thanks to Antonio Salinas, S.I.B-Betelgeuse


Hello Scott:

Your kind translations save us all oceans of time!

This particular case interested me, it has a known date, hour,
and location which I can look up.

Unlike those useless nite-lite reports (three of them together
make an FT of course) we have a visible round structure, a
landing with some sort of traces etc.

There are two or three possible flaws here however:

1) If I read correctly, there is only one single witness.

2) The slow motion suggests a possible balloon. Seen against the
blinding Sun, it might not have been possible for Maldonado to
get a good enough look to tell the difference.

I tried to learn more from the URL you provided:

 >http://listen.to/sib

.. but they keep saying "stay tuned" (or whatever) and now I
cannot even bring up the website any more.

Is there any other source with more information that might
clarify these matters? Hopefully more witnesses may turn up,
either confirming that this was anomalous, or perhaps that it
was indeed a balloon!


Best!

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:51:44 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:30:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 13:26:58 -0400

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Dick Hall had said to Bob Young:

 >>So far you have appealed to authority to wipe out the Coyne and
 >>Cash-Landrum cases, without offering any reasonable explanations
 >>and without addressing the salient features of the cases. And
 >>you have stated that Venus is a reasonable explanation for the
 >>Ravenna case, although that is entirely counter-to-fact. If you
 >>really believe that rather incredible hypothesis, then it is
 >>incumbent upon you to explain the features of the case that I
 >>have cited above.

 >What did you expect? Do you think a skeptic would be a skeptic
 >if he had done some minimal research on the subject of UFOs with
 >minimal scientific reasoning?

Serge,

A true skeptic in the traditional sense would have responded by
doing research and applying logic and reason. It is not my
expectation that Bob will necessarily behave like a true
skeptic. It is my expectation that his (so far) unscientific and
illogical approach to UFO cases will be exposed for public
examination. Otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time.


Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                           Re: More Occam - Jones

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 12:58:16 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:34:53 -0400
Subject: Re: More Occam - Jones


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: More Occam
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:07:42 -0400

Hi Greg

I really liked your explanation and summary of the mis-use of
Occam's Razor.

I would recount from the film 'Contact', the book being written by
Carl Saigon, one line near the very end. Jade Foster plays Ell
Array, she is being 'tried' for her report and the interviewer,
being the nasty-man (who's name escapes me), asked her:


"Are you aware of the theory of Occam's Razor?"

"Yes." she replies,

"All things being equal, the simplest solution often tends to be
the right one."


The point here is, _all_things_being_equal_.

I think your missive relayed this in a more understandable way
to the masses.

However, just another thing if I may <g>

Later in the film the matter of eighteen hours of static was
'discovered'. So things where not equal. <g>

I would strongly suggest that those who have not seen the film,
see it, it is very good, and to a degree, it is a social
comment.


Just my tuppence worth.



    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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:00 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:44:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:17:18 -0500

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 18:07:37 -0300

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

<snip>

 >Stan and listfolk,

 >>>Beyond that, consider this assessment of the man from a fellow
 >>>astronomer and noncombatant in the UFO wars:

 >>>"Menzel led a double life. The crusty astronomer was a
 >>>high-ranking agent of the National Security Agency..... He used
 >>>his position to blacken the reputations and damage the careers
 >>>of scientific opponents, produced fake research supporting his
 >>>masters, [and] betrayed his president [Eisenhower]..... The
 >>>seediest part of his career began in 1960. Menzel - still a
 >>>serving [intelligence] officer - offered to supply presidential
 >>>candidate John F. Kennedy with secret data on intelligence
 >>>activity during Ike's administration..... The files now reveal a
 >>>sordid stack of letters to JFK, abusing rivals and supposed
 >>>friends, and urging positions of authority be given to the
 >>>selfless Menzel. Many were." (Ian Seymour, in Astronomy Now,
 >>>December 1992)

 >>I had seen this piece years ago and am convinced it is a vicious
 >>and massive misrepresentation of the data in my Jan/Feb. 1988
 >>International UFO Reporter Article 'The Secret Life of Donald H.
 >>Menzel',

 >I was responsible for getting this very interesting article
 >published in IUR 13 years ago... my, time does fly whether
 >you're having fun or not. I would be very much surprised if Ian
 >Seymour based his article on Stan's piece, or if he was even
 >aware of its existence. IUR had and has a very small
 >circulation.

Don't be so modest, Jerry.

I had letters from Europe about the Menzel information,
including one from a person who had been mystified by Menzel's
fixation on 'Martians' and all the little drawings he used to
make of them, but thought he now understood: Menzel had seen an
alien body!

In addition many copies of my 108pg. 'Final Report on Operation
Majestic 12', published by FUFOR in 1990 and distributed by them
and me, even included more information about Menzel and more
quotes from his letters.

Do you know of any other source of quotes from Menzel's letters
besides my work?

 >>Menzel also gave his frank assessment of Detlev Bronk and Hug
 >>Drydenon Dec. 27, 1960... after the presidential election. There
 >>is no treason here. Menzel had also noted that he had written a
 >>report about the NSA for the Ike administration. There is no
 >>sign of treason.

My bad typing. That is _Hugh_ Dryden.

 >I don't recall seeing the accusation of "treason" in the
 >discussion till now. Menzel's critics have accused him of shoddy
 >behavior and lousy science, neither failing synonymous with
 >treason. If anyone has charged him with being a traitor, I have
 >yet to hear it.

Betrayal of the President, release of information to uncleared
people... sounds much like treason to me.

 >Stan is an old and valued friend, and I mean no offense when I
 >say I consider it ironic, to say the least, that, in defending
 >Menzel, he has allied himself with persons with whom ordinarily
 >he has not a thing in common.

I do consider us friends Jerry. I much appreciate your
willingness to publish my article.....

And I still consider Menzel as unscientific, irrational,
arrogant, overbearing and viciously anti, when it comes to UFOs
as documented by Jim McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, Brad Sparks and
others. But he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences
and one of the top dogs in the astronomical community.

As I noted in my IUR piece and in FROMJ-12 and in my Menzel
Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC, I think he was playing a role for
the MJ-12 group.

Many people have led double lives because of their Intelligence
Activity masters... Think again of Burgess, McLean, Philby,
Hansen, Ames.

As a close colleague of Menzel for decades noted to me, DM would
have enjoyed knowing the truth and keeping other scientists away
from it.

I am not defending Menzel's nefarious anti-ufological stand. I
am trying to understand it. I am sure that darn few of those who
defend Menzel would accept the notion that he was part of
Operation Majestic 12.Guilt by association seems inappropriate.I
have never defended Menzel's ufology.

I do think Ian Seymour went way overboard. I wish I knew more
about him, especially if he is still alive.

Anybody have any data out there?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 11:34:47 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:48:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Ledger


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Easton
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 01:44:03 +0100

 >Regarding:

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:55:30 -0000

<snip>

 >Is ridicule a lifetime's 'achievement'?


James,

I don't know. You're the expert... you tell us.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 10:40:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:50:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release - Young

X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138

 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Release
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 20:57:38 -0400

<snip>

 >Again, this shows how well Greer vetted his witnesses. Not!

 >And once again, if Greer can "vector" alien spacecraft into an
 >area, he should be able to produce all kinds of technical data
 >on them. But he can't produce one iota of technical data, and
 >all we have is a group of witnesses, some which are definitely
 >telling tall tales.

Jan, Dick, Bill, List:

Another character on the list of "witnesses" is retired Army
Sgt. Clifford D. Stone.

He once told a tale of how he was personally present at an Ohio
Air Force base when the armed convoy carrying the recovered
Kecksburg crashed saucer came in, and watched later that night
as the convoy left.

Trouble was, at the time he was 16 years old and lived about 90
miles away. When I pointed this out, new details of his story
were published: supposedly, a friend who worked at the base had
called him, asked if he wanted to see the UFO that had crashed
that day, and drove him there, where he hid outside the gate in
the parking lot and watched the event. Presumeably he was then
driven home in time for school the next day.

He has never again told this story, to my knowledge, despite
being on local radio shows near Kecksburg talking for hours
about the incident, or in a book which devoted more than a
chapter to detailing his search for documents related to the Dec
9, 1965, meteor-fireball.

It will be interesting to see if Stone recounts his personal
role in this dramatic UFO event, or for some mysterious reason
neglects to mention it, again.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 10:41:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:54:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:56:09 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Kevin:

What is the cause the the effect you described? Do you think
that it might have been the reason the Coyne aircraft gained
altitude?


Bob









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                                Greer On Bell

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 07:45:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:59:06 -0400
Subject: Greer On Bell


 >Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Weird Whirlpool

 >http://www.kfmb.com/special_assignment/archive/2001/04/weird.php

 >I think Jan brought this subject up on UpDates, to which I had
 >responded.

 >...and, no, I don't think this has anything to do with any
 >actual 'UFOs', although they are mentioned throughout the
 >newscast, including an interview with one 'UFO expert' or
 >someone who says it's "definitely a possibility" that it's a
 >UFO. Whatever.....

 >FWIW, Greer is on Bell tonight.


Hello Ron and all:

I heard parts and pieces of the Greer interview on Art Bell on
my way home Friday nite.

I cannot begin to recall the dizzying assertions, theories and
all which came out of the tired old loudspeaker in my 1979
Oldsmobile.

One upshot is that some previously secret insiders will reveal
that the USA (and perhaps other nations) have been blasting
alien space-ships out of our skies in recent times. Predictably,
Art and Dr. Greer expressed dismay at this unconscionable
behavior. There is lots more of course. But, like Richard
Hoagland, the BS comes so fast and so thick that the mind spins
and drops the details.

Like the old preacher said: "You baffles them with BS, you takes
their money, and gets the @#$% out of town kid!"

If I have it right, the Greer dog-and-pony show will take place
in the next week or so. Serious students of the UFO should
already expect a tarring by the same tired brush.

Serious (honest) skeptics can well differentiate between circus
clowns and those they simply disagree with. Knee-jerk types will
stand ready with tar, feathers, and the same tired
indiscriminate brush.

I think I will take a day off work and get quietly drunk.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                       C.E.: Dr Reed and Robert Raith

From: Peter B. Davenport <ufocntr@NWLINK.COM>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 09:10:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 13:04:55 -0400
Subject: C.E.: Dr Reed and Robert Raith


I have avoided getting involved here with the Reed Case, since
it appears to be little more than a waste of everyone's time,
but I have decided to do so just once... with the hopes that it
lays the issue to rest, once and for all!

Several people have looked into the case, and most of all, into
Reed's alleged background, and so far, everything has come up
"snake eyes." Please allow me to elaborate...

1) The night that Reed was first on Art Bell's program, sometime
in the fall of 1998, I believe, he asserted that approximately
two days after he allegedly had clubbed the hapless alien,
sometime in mid-October 1996, he had called the National UFO
Reporting Center in Seattle and reported the facts to me,
personally. He went on to say, I believe, that he was
disappointed that I hadn't exhibited much interest in the case
at that time.

The problem with this part of the story is that Jonathan Reed
apparently did not do his homework... I spent virtually the
entire month of October 1996 (from 08OC to 28OC) in Australia. I
was a speaker at the conference in Brisbane that month. Many
individuals, including Glennys Mackay, the conference organizer,
together with others, e.g. Stan Friedman, Whitley Strieber,
George Wingfield, etc., can attest to these facts...as can my
stamped passport.

Reed just chose the wrong month to include my name in this
hoax...

2) Reed described himself as a "Ph.D.," in child psychology (!!),
I believe. The problem with this assertion is that no one can
find any record of his ever having attended the institution from
which he claims to have received his doctorate. Moreover, no one
can find a dissertation that can be ascribed to him... anywhere.
It isn't in any list of Ph.D. dissertations, to best of anyone's
knowledge.

When Reed was confronted with this issue at the UFO Congress in
March 2000, he reacted in an obviously agitated fashion and
declared that he was not willing to address questions about his
past "at this time." He did not state when he would be willing
to address this issue, so I suppose it is a "dead letter," no
pun intended.

3) On several occasions, Reed has asserted on national radio
that he worked as a Ph.D.-grade researcher in child psychology
at the University of Washington in Seattle. One problem with
this part of the story... There is no record of his ever having
worked there, in any capacity. I am aware of at least two
individuals who have contacted the appropriate departments and
administrators at the UW, and there is no trace of his having
been there. The people who would have hired him, supervised his
work, and worked with him on a daily basis, have no recollection
of any such person.

Moreover, Reed, to the best of my knowledge, has not come
forward with pay stubs, acceptance letters, transcripts, memos,
photographs, roommates' testimony, or any other of the
documentation we all accumulate from our work and studies, which
would convince a reasonable person that he had, in fact, done
the things he has claimed. Once again, we see the Lazar
Syndrome. The big, all-knowing "vacuum cleaner in the sky" that
mysteriously just sucked everything out of files cabinets,
storage boxes, wallets, etc., leaving the individual totally
devoid of any kind of objective documentation of his past.

There are many other inconsistencies in his story that I do not
address here

When I think of the billions of man hours... _billions_... that
have been wasted on this story, I weep inside. What worthwhile
endeavors could have been accomplished, had all that time been
invested wisely, rather than squandered on what clearly appears
to be nothing more than a contrived story.

I propose that we move on to other, more worthwhile, endeavors.
Until Reed starts documenting his past, let's do something that
doesn't have us pouring even more of our time into a this
sinkhole of nonsense! Clearly, the ball is in Reed's court. It
is his responsibility to address the issues addressed above, and
lay them to rest, before he deserves any more of our time and
attention regarding "Dead Freddie".


Peter Davenport

Director National UFO Reporting Center
PO Box 45623
University Station
Seattle, WA 98145
director@ufocenter.com
http://www.UFOcenter.com
Hotline: 206-722-3000 (From 8AM to Midnight Pacific preferred)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                    Re: Italian TV UFO Program - Lissoni

From: Alfredo Lissoni <retecun@tiscalinet.it>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 18:08:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 13:07:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Italian TV UFO Program - Lissoni


 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Italian TV UFO Program
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 07:50:50 -0500 (CDT)
 >From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc <9a4ag@clarc.org>

<snip>

 >Yesterday, 2nd May 2001 at about 11.45 a.m., the Italian TV
 >station RAI3 aired a program on ufology titled "Primo Piano". I
 >didn't watch the program from the start, only the last 15
 >minutes.

 >Anyway, there were two guests on the show: Alfredo Lissoni from
 >CUN (the Italian National Ufological Centre), and the director
 >of an italian science popularizing magazine, I think his name
 >was Piero Bianucci, who was skeptical about UFOs as
 >extraterrestrials.

 >Bianucci offered some natural explanations of the various UFO
 >sightings (meteorological phenomena, military planes, etc.)
 >Lissoni stressed that scientific investigation of UFOs is
 >required, but said that simplistic explanations cannot always
 >explain the phenomenon.

 >On the whole, I think the program was well balanced. Except that
 >the host didn't allow a direct discussion to develop. Each guest
 >was allowed to say what he thought, and that's it. There was no
 >lively discussion and polemic.

 >I don't know whether the program was pre-taped or was 'live'.


Pre-taped, but interview were live.

Best wishes

Alfredo Lissoni







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 13:53:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:18:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks


 >From: Robert Gates RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 00:21:30 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 >Don Wrote:

 >>I've yet to see one debunker back away from an obviously flawed
 >>explanation to a sighting, while I've seen many older UFO cases
 >>dusted off and declared not worth considering further by UFO
 >>investigators. Debunkers on the other hand seem to want to hold
 >>their lines at all costs - including their credibility.

 >Hi Don,

 >An excellent point. Debunkers don't back away from any obviously
 >flawed explaination. You will never hear a debunker say words
 >like "Gosh, my original explaination was totally full of crap
 >and I misinterpreted the evidence..." or something like that.
 >What you hear from the debunkers is they float a new
 >explaination all the while babbling about how this fits the case
 >better, etc etc.

 >Debunkers haven't changed since the early days and I suspect it
 >is very likely that all modern day debunkers do is replow ground
 >already plowed by Menzel et all to some degree or another.


The scientifically proper procedure is to recount the
intellectual history of a topic after doing a literature search.
The skeptics and debunkers almost never do that.

They seem to hate recounting previous inconsistent explanations
of a UFO case because they do not want any doubt that their
(latest) explanation is the one true correct explanation.

To mention previous contradictory theories would raise doubts
about the current one and might diminish their claim of credit
for killing the case.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                         Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:22:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser


 >Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 07:45:30 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Greer On Bell

 >>Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
 >>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >>Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>FWIW, Greer is on Bell tonight.

 >I heard parts and pieces of the Greer interview on Art Bell on
 >my way home Friday nite.

 >I cannot begin to recall the dizzying assertions, theories and
 >all which came out of the tired old loudspeaker in my 1979
 >Oldsmobile.

 >One upshot is that some previously secret insiders will reveal
 >that the USA (and perhaps other nations) have been blasting
 >alien space-ships out of our skies in recent times. Predictably,
 >Art and Dr. Greer expressed dismay at this unconscionable
 >behavior. There is lots more of course. But, like Richard
 >Hoagland, the BS comes so fast and so thick that the mind spins
 >and drops the details.

 >Like the old preacher said: "You baffles them with BS, you takes
 >their money, and gets the @#$% out of town kid!"

 >If I have it right, the Greer dog-and-pony show will take place
 >in the next week or so. Serious students of the UFO should
 >already expect a tarring by the same tired brush.

 >Serious (honest) skeptics can well differentiate between circus
 >clowns and those they simply disagree with. Knee-jerk types will
 >stand ready with tar, feathers, and the same tired
 >indiscriminate brush.

 >I think I will take a day off work and get quietly drunk.


FYI-

Four days of events are planned for this week, beginning with
the Disclosure Project Briefing for the Press on Wednesday, May
9th, at the National Press Club.

The next day there will be a "VIP Luncheon", with meetings on
Capitol Hill the rest of Thursday and Friday.

On Saturday the public event will take place in DC, with a full
day of "Briefings" and presentations.

I've spoken with some who believe this will be the beginning of
the end for UFO secrecy. I would like to hope that is true, but
have my doubts.

If anyone has any leads as to who will be attending the VIP
Luncheon or meetings on Capitol Hill, I would be most
interested.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 13:55:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:54:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:00 -0300


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:17:18 -0500

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 18:07:37 -0300

 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 09:41:15 -0500

Stan,

 >>I don't recall seeing the accusation of "treason" in the
 >>discussion till now. Menzel's critics have accused him of shoddy
 >>behavior and lousy science, neither failing synonymous with
 >>treason. If anyone has charged him with being a traitor, I have
 >>yet to hear it.

 >Betrayal of the President, release of information to uncleared
 >people... sounds much like treason to me.

It shouldn't. These activities do not fit any definition of
treason. They describe things that happen in Washington every
day, as for example when documents and information are leaked to
reporters or other interested parties. The worst that can be
said of Menzel in this context is that he acted out of self
interest and conducted himself in a way that left him open to
questions about his ethics. He certainly was no model public
servant.

Ian Seymour doesn't accuse Menzel of treason (defined as
trafficking with the enemies of one's country), but he does say
Menzel behaved badly. Menzel had his faults, but treason, an
extremely serious and damaging charge not to be hurled lightly,
cannot be counted among them.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 15:13:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 15:24:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Randle


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 10:41:27 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:56:09 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Kevin:

 >What is the cause the the effect you described? Do you think
 >that it might have been the reason the Coyne aircraft gained
 >altitude?


Bob, all -

I believe it has to do with the trim tabs on the trailing edge of the
rotorblades that were bent at the incorrect angle, my position in the
flight, the lack of cargo and passengers and about half the fuel we
normally carried (burned off in flight).

Although I was attempting to descend with the rest of the
flight, I was not descending as fast as the rest of them and was
forced to take other actions. I was not in a climb as Coyne was.

This was not offered as an explanation of the situation that
Coyne found himself in. I was merely suggesting that I found the
explanations offered to be less than adequate and since Coyne
had undergone the very same training that I had, and he had
experience in helicopter operations (otherwise he wouldn't have
been the pilot in command), I did not, and do not, accept the
idea that he had inadvertantly entered a climb by manipulating
the controls unconsciously or that he had forgotten that he had
done so.

I am surprised that other helicopter pilots have not commented
on this, though I suppose most of them aren't interested in
UFOs.

My point is, based on my experience as a helicopter pilot, that
the explanation for the climb that Coyne was in does not work.
Doesn't mean that there was a "tractor beam" from an alien
spacecraft, only that the explanation is unacceptable.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:07:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:34:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:39:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100

 >>>The reasons why this should be the case are worthy of study in
 >>themselves - and indeed there a few sociologists and folklorists
 >>who have made attempts at studying motivations and belief
 >>systems held by UFOlogists.

 >It is difficult to walk the fine line between the two
 >"traditions" (all sightings explainable vs some not explainable)
 >without getting vociferous arguments from whichever side you are
 >discussing. Hard nosed skeptics/scoffers/debunkers find it
 >unbelieveably illogical to BELIEVE that there could be any
 >sightings that couldn't be explained in conventional terms.
 >Their ultimate resort is that "there will be unexplained
 >sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
 >not enough information to form a conclusion." To this the
 >skeptics from the other side argue that there are sightings
 >which have more than enough credible information for explanation
 >or identification, but the information in the sighting report
 >contradicts all conventional explanations.

 >And, it would seem, never the twain shall meet!

 >Without unexplained cases there would be no ufology as we know
 >it now. (There might be "ufology" based on hte paranormal or
 >visions reported by cultists and religionists, etc. I, for one,
 >would not be interested in that sort of ufology.)


Hi Bruce,

Thanks for your thoughtful, erudite response. At least someone
has taken the trouble to read what I have been saying rather
than jumping to conclusions.

At the end of the day, I'll have to lay my cards on the table
and go with your group who say "there will be unexplained
sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
not enough information to form a conclusion."

But to me that is the definition of a doubter/skeptic, not a
debunker (as I keep pointing out, 'debunk' is to expose false
claims, where these arise - Jerry Clark is a debunker of the
1897 Kansas Calfnapping, for example) - in my view only
individual claims can be "debunked" where there is sufficient
evidence to warrant such action.

Taking the stance that "there will always be unexplained
sightings" is a honest and open-minded standpoint. It's the same
viewpoint that the British MoD seem to have arived at after
years of study - judging by what the retired RAF Intelligence
personnel I've been interviewing have told me.

I'd never rule out the possibility that some of these
unexplained cases could be/were extraterrestrial visitations;
but to me, there is no evidence. Until there is, I'll stick with
the "case not proven."


Dave Clarke









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:36:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:05:12 -0500


Hi Jerry,

 >I guess it's easier to employ dopey sarcasm
 >than to address the quite specific points we raised about
 >Menzel's failings. I guess this is your way of conceding the
 >obvious: that your postings were poorly considered and not
 >defensible. Or, to paraphrase a line from an old blues, your
 >mind was on vacation while your fingers were working overtime.

I'm amused that you feel my postings were "poorly considered";
perhaps if you had been paying sufficient attention you might
have noticed that I closed with the phrase:

 >>Yours tongue in cheek
 >>Dave Clarke

But this just reveals what I already suspected, that Jerry Clark
has no sense of humour!

As for:

 >Your fingers are still busy, I see. What you mistake for a
 >choir, of course, is rather more likely a single voice inside
 >your head, warning you that incredible as it may seem, the ever
 >confident, ever condescending Dr. David Clarke may be wrong.
 >Maybe very wrong.

Coming from someone who has turned condescension into an
art form, I'll take this as a compliment!

Now I'm off to attend to my next project - setting up the
"Donald Menzel Appreciation Society."

Steady on....Only joking!


Dave Clarke










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:40:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:05:12 -0500


Dr. Dave,

 >I'm amused that you feel my postings were "poorly considered";
 >perhaps if you had been paying sufficient attention you might
 >have noticed that I closed with the phrase:

 >>>Yours tongue in cheek
 >>>Dave Clarke

 >But this just reveals what I already suspected, that Jerry Clark
 >has no sense of humour!

Two more reasons I am not a pelicanist: (1) I don't have to use
exclamation points without justification. (2) I don't have to
pretend to know things about people I've never met. Does anybody
who has ever spent more than five minutes talking with me think
I don't have a sense of humor? Errol, on whose radio show I have
appeared on several occasions, will know whereof I type. I've
often suspected that the accusation that somebody else lacks a
sense of humor is the true last refuge of the scoundrel. Except
that I know you aren't a scoundrel.

Of course, if _I_ were a scoundrel, I would deduce that your
failure to chuckle at the obviously comic image of a vacationing
mind coupled with fingers working overtime suggests that _you_
are humorless. Except that I know better.

 >>Your fingers are still busy, I see. What you mistake for a
 >>choir, of course, is rather more likely a single voice inside
 >>your head, warning you that incredible as it may seem, the ever
 >>confident, ever condescending Dr. David Clarke may be wrong.
 >>Maybe very wrong.

 >Coming from someone who has turned condescension into an
 >art form, I'll take this as a compliment!

Better that than acknowledge that you may be wrong, I'm sure. In
any event, I can only dream of matching the condescension skills
of the typical British pelicanist. Maybe if I started attending
your Donald Menzel Appreciation Society meetings.....


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:03:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:42:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 07:45:30 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Greer On Bell

 >>>Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
 >>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >>>Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Four days of events are planned for this week, beginning with
 >the Disclosure Project Briefing for the Press on Wednesday, May
 >9th, at the National Press Club.

 >The next day there will be a "VIP Luncheon", with meetings on
 >Capitol Hill the rest of Thursday and Friday.

 >On Saturday the public event will take place in DC, with a full
 >day of "Briefings" and presentations.

 >I've spoken with some who believe this will be the beginning of
 >the end for UFO secrecy. I would like to hope that is true, but
 >have my doubts.

 >If anyone has any leads as to who will be attending the VIP
 >Luncheon or meetings on Capitol Hill, I would be most
 >interested.


Hello Steve:

Question:  Have you or anyone else seen the price of upgrading
participation in this event, from the basic dumb-rube rate up to
the VIP Luncheon in-crowd ticket?

Clearly, somebody has to pay for all those luncheon snacks, not
to mention a chance to meet Dr. Greer in person.

Hopefully there will be lots of cameras rolling so that we can
learn who became part of the elite, how well dressed they were
etc., and who fell by the wayside.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                        Re: Serious Research - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:26:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:47:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sandow


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Haisch's website provides a link to the Sturrock Panel report,
 >>without any comment. This suggests to me that he must be
 >>endorsing it.

Haisch says, on his www.ufoskeptic.com homepage:

"[A]ll in all I have now gotten to the point in my exposure to
the subject at which I think it somewhat more likely than not
that something not merely delusional, but real and important may
be going on with regard to the UFO phenomenon."

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the ETH. But Haisch
is being cautious in this summary. Elsewhere on his site:

-- He considers very seriously the possibility that the US
government may have secret knowledge of an alien presence. Nor
is he simply speculating. Over the years, he says, he's gotten
to know people with knowledge of secret government projects, and
these people have dropped hints to him that he takes seriously.

-- He considers very seriously the possibility that aliens are
revealing themselves slowly, to prepare us for contact with them.
This, he thinks, could explain some of the enigmatic things about
UFO reports.

These are hardly the thoughts of someone who rejects the ETH.

And if we're going to talk about things Haisch links to without
comment, one of them is Marcello Truzzi's essay, 'On
Pseudo-Skepticism', which wouldn't make Bob Young and other
skeptics here happy. Here's one short excerpt:


"Over the years, I have decried the misuse of the term 'skeptic'
when used to refer to all critics of anomaly claims. Alas, the
label has been thus misapplied by both proponents and critics of
the paranormal. Sometimes users of the term have distinguished
between so-called 'soft' versus 'hard' skeptics, and I in part
revived the term 'zetetic' because of the term's misuse. But I
now think the problems created go beyond mere terminology and
matters need to be set right. Since 'skepticism' properly refers
to doubt rather than denial - nonbelief rather than belief -
critics who take the negative rather than an agnostic position
but still call themselves 'skeptics' are actually
pseudo-skeptics and have, I believed, gained a false advantage
by usurping that label....

"Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call
themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden
of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be
appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic. A result of
this is that many critics seem to feel it is only necessary to
present a case for their counter-claims based upon plausibility
rather than empirical evidence."


Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                           Re: More Occam - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:30:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:49:38 -0400
Subject: Re: More Occam - Sandow


 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 12:58:16 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: More Occam

 >Hi Greg

 >I really liked your explanation and summary of the mis-use of
 >Occam's Razor.

Thanks, Sean.

 >I would recount from the film 'Contact', the book being written by
 >Carl Saigon, one line near the very end. Jade Foster plays Ell
 >Array, she is being 'tried' for her report and the interviewer,
 >being the nasty-man (who's name escapes me), asked her:

 >"Are you aware of the theory of Occam's Razor?"

 >"Yes." she replies,

 >"All things being equal, the simplest solution often tends to be
 >the right one."

 >The point here is, _all_things_being_equal_.

Excellent summary! Much more concise than mine.

 >I would strongly suggest that those who have not seen the film,
 >see it, it is very good, and to a degree, it is a social
 >comment.

I agree. I also liked the Carl Sagan novel the movie came from.
Full of very radical speculation, much more so than the movie.


Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 5

                  Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:33:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:59:47 -0400
Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Bourdais


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:40:04 +0100

 >>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 05:57:23 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!

 >>Ostensibly, we have this rather likeable sounding chap who is
 >>taking a well-earned retirement from UFO matters.

 >That pretty well sums it up. The BFSB was very much a small
 >local social club run by a few old stalwart Ufologists such as
 >Dennis who have not really been in the mainstream of Ufology for
 >a very long time. So they opted to call it a day. And I don't
 >blame them one bit if they felt it was time.

 >The media publicity hasn't been engineered. Its just been a story
 >that caught attention because it probably gave a different spin
 >on a subject that the media now consider tired (certainly in the
 >UK where media interest and book sales on UFOs have plummeted in
 >the past year or so). That it went global from there was
 >probably just down to good hype and a slow news day.

Hello, Jenny, and the List.

I gathered that at least one book sells pretty well at the
moment in the UK: 'You Can't Tell The People' by Georgina Bruni.
She is invited to speak at Oxford University.

Another event is that Lord Hill Norton has just asked new
questions on Rendlesham in the House of Lords, according to
Georgina.

Is The Times going to do an article, at least as large as the
one on the FSB?

We also learn, thanks to Graham Birdsall, that UFO sightings are
on the increase in your country. So it seems that the topic of
UFOs is not so dead after all.

What are they doing at The Times? Are they listening? Who runs
the newspaper? Who decides what articles are to be printed, and
whith what size?

The Times article has three pictures with it, one of them a
large photo of the good Mr Plunkett. You admit that such a
minuscule information should never have gone farther than a
small piece in a very local newspaper.

So, are they idiots and incompetents at The Times? Certainly
not. It has been decided, I am sure, with competence. It is a
very significant piece of pseudo-information. (shall I dare to
say... "disinformation"?).

Graham Birdsall recalls that the journalist who wrote the
article, Simon de Bruxelles, has already written other debunking
articles in the past. Do you know that journalist? What is your
opinion about him?

I recall that it was The Times which launched a perfectly
preposterous explanation of the Belgian wave, as having been
caused by the 'Lo Flyte'. Information which was instantly
repeated by all the Belgian media. A young Belgian ufologist,
Thiery Wathelet, inquired in the United States.

He got the press release explaining that it was a futuristic
project of hypersonic, 'wave rider', plane. For the time being
(in 1996), a small scale model was to be test flown at Edwards
AFB.

As you know, the Belgian wave occured between 1989 and 1992 for
the most part. Wathelet gave the information to the media, but
nobody passed it on. What a wonderful world of democratic
information! There is no innocent blunder there.

<snip>

 >>5) How can such a group create news by folding its tent, when
 >>nobody knew it existed in the first place?

 >Slow news day. Hype. A persuasive reporter who saw his chance to
 >get a story sold. A new angle on UFOs (killing them off probably
 >appealed to the UK media as we love to do down our heroes). I
 >doubt very much there's any need for discerning a 'plot'. Its
 >just how these things work.

I don't know if the word "plot" is well chosen, but it looks
like a well designed operation to me. It contains all the seeds
of outragous claims made by those who copied it.

The big French daily 'Le Figaro', the next day, mimics The
Times with a front page article entitled: 'London closes the
Flying Saucer Bureau'.

And in the text, it talks of the very official British Bureau of
Flying saucers, etc.

No wonder that a good friend of mine, knowing about my interest
in UFOs, told me she was worried for me because the heard that
the British government was cutting the budget and closing its
reserch on UFOs!

This not a chapter for a 'Debunkers Guide Book', it's the real
thing, caught in the act.

Another thought.....

You don't need to worry so much about Dr Greer's show in
Washington: it will not get as much press as the Flying Saucer
Bureau! Not one tenth of it, I am sure, at least in my country.

If there are false witnesses infiltrated (amplifying
disinformation?), it will just make things easier to wipe the
thing under the rug.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

             Just Clark/e-ing Around [was: Debunkers' Guidebook]

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 18:59:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:08:18 -0400
Subject: Just Clark/e-ing Around [was: Debunkers' Guidebook]


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:05:12 -0500


OK, OK... listen up... is there any way we can reduce the number
of Clark/e'ses here? It's getting _very_ confusing.

I have a solution.....

Please, identify yourselves as 'Pro-Clark', 'Anti-Clark' and
Definitely Clark. OK?


Thanks,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                    Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:59:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:13:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters - McCoy



Hello, all, John.

 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 17:52:35 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Keen On Pilot Encounters

 >>Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 16:48:10 -0400
 >>To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Keen On Pilot Encounters

 >>Source: The Providence Journal

 >>http://www.projo.com/cgi-bin/story.pl/opinion/05405261.htm

 >>5.3.2001 00:05

 >>Pilot Encounters With UFOs: Study Challenges Secrecy (And
 >>Denial)

 >>Leslie Kean
 >>San Francisco

Well, here is one thing that a few of us know about, and I can
verify that there are many unusual things that happen that don't
get reported (even if I witnessed them).

The battle cry: "Are You Nuts? Well _are_ you?"

 >>In January, Agence France Presse reported that a Siberian
 >>airport was shut for 11/2 hours while a luminescent unidentified
 >>flying object hovered above its runway. Although it's hard to
 >>imagine such an event taking place in the industrialized United
 >>States, a compelling October 2000 study by a retired aerospace
 >>scientist from NASA-Ames Research Center shows that similar
 >>incidents have occurred in American skies over the last 50
 >>years. "Aviation Safety in America -- A Previously Neglected
 >>Factor" presents more than 100 pilot and crew reports of
 >>encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that appear
 >>to have compromised aviation safety.

Yes, but the mere fact that only roughly 100 reports are
present, there is a lot more going on, I assure you. Yes, most
of what is seen are unusual lights in the sky. but others are
solid objects.

Some of this is what people that Pilots and Controllers have
told me personally. Like my friend that in an earlier post, got
passed by the Moon that wasn't up,on the right, while flying at
night. Three Controllers sat in an Control Tower and saw a
classic Disc "Buzz" them. No they did not report that."Are You
Nuts?'' I knew these guys.

 >Yeah! This is the _stuff_ baby!

 >As any "New Yorker" might shout out (while pointing to his crotch,)

 >..."Debunk this!"  <LOL>


I agree,John but they will in Klassic denial.

 >Whenever I'm asked about 'evidence' for the existence of UFOs
 >one of the things I like to offer in response are all the pilot
 >reports that have been gathered over the years.

 >In this compilation of reports you have the eyewitness testimony
 >of veteran pilots, their crews, as well as from ground support
 >personnel. It doesn't get any more 'rock solid' (in terms of
 >witness credibility and expertise) than it does with this
 >subgroup of UFO reports and reporters.


At last some support of my position that Pilots and others in
Aviation do have interest in things in the sky. My Own wife
notes I look up every time I go outside, I do because I want to
and it's a Pilot thing checking weather you know.

 >As far as I'm concerned, these guys (pilots) _are_ the "experts"
 >when it comes to knowing the contents of the sky. If so many
 >veteran pilots all tell you they are seeing silver discs and
 >assorted and sundry shaped other (unknown) aircraft up there,
 >you can safely bet the farm that there are 'unknowns' flying
 >around in our skies. That's the kind of testimony we should all
 >give 'heavy weight' to. Shoot, I'd be willing to take so many
 >experienced men at their word. But that's not the world we live
 >in.

Yes if more would come forward the only reason I'm 'out' now is
the fact that I don't work as a Pilot anymore. There is a
culture of denial/debunking that goes with the business. You are
required to be mentally stable to be an Airline Transport Pilot
(ATP). And, reporting things that nearly hit you that aren't
say, your average Cessna, 737, or Pelican, will get you in big,
big, trouble.

 >These reports, as 'stand alone's', should be enough to convince
 >the hardest sceptic that there is 'something' (not ours) in our
 >skies. I consider it a deep disrespect of these men and women
 >that their collective 'word' can be so easily called into
 >question by _armchair_ critics of the phenomenon.

Well, John, it appears so, even when one knows the nesting
habits of the American White Pelican.

 >Pelicans my a**.

Yep, it was a flock of pelicans flying in a classic disc with,
oh, several portholes around it that flew through a fire I was
working back in '89, but I wasn't there, we were reloading
retardant but heard about it on the Forest net. Several saw it.
Ground and Aircrews both. Nobody reported it. "Are You Nuts?"

 >The real mind-blower is; if so few pilots are willing to report
 >UFO encounters for fear of job related hassles, imagine how many
 >sightings go unrecorded! The skies must be teeming with UFOs.
 >Maybe even enough to account for all the abduction reports.
 ><VBEG>

John, the Saucers are gone. Don't you trust the media? <G>

 >The 'word' alone of these many professionals, (good, honorable
 >men and women when taken as a group) is 'good enough' for me,
 >any day. ;)

Thanks, I really, do. It's hard enough to make it in the world
of aviation, and when you are near or at the top, to make
statements that could jeopardize your career, takes real
cajones, as they could be handed to you if you are too uppity
- as per the Japanese 747 driver.

 >We've been _told_. We've got UFOs up dere people! We have to
 >begin to band together at some point and demand 'en masse' from
 >our respective governments that we be told the truth regarding
 >the UFOs. Maybe we ought to launch an expanded 'worldwide'
 >version of the Roswell petition and present our respective
 >government leaders with signed petitions from the "People of the
 >whole World."

 >I recall an old 60's rant that went like so,...

 >"The People, united, can never be defeated."

I agree, also remember Ben Franklin's (I think) words: "We must
all hang together or we will hang separately."

With Bozos around like Greer and his Ringmaster Bell, I can't
with baited breath, wait to hear his latest revelation. Bait as
in week old shusi folks.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:16:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:00 -0300

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:17:18 -0500

<snip>

 >And I still consider Menzel as unscientific, irrational,
 >arrogant, overbearing and viciously anti, when it comes to UFOs
 >as documented by Jim McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, Brad Sparks and
 >others. But he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences
 >and one of the top dogs in the astronomical community.

 >As I noted in my IUR piece and in FROMJ-12 and in my Menzel
 >Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC, I think he was playing a role for
 >the MJ-12 group.

<snip>

 >Stan

Jerry, Stan,

Pardon my present state of deshabille - I'm in the midst of
moving a ton of paper from one place to another - but what's
friendship got to do with it, anyway? If anything, it's a
detriment, not a bonus, as it tends to cloud judgment. It might
even hinder same.

You, Stan, and Budd Hopkins, could be the best friends on the
planet Earth, for example, and that wouldn't necessarily move us
one step closer to anything.

More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
- that should be your job.)

Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
with yours?

Let's get even more interesting: Who, in your estimation, makes
up today's MJ-12? Who replaced Menzel? Who heads it up now? Who
are the other 11 members? And what proof do you have of same?

None. Nothing whatsoever.

And it's high time that Jerry Clark called you, Budd Hopkins,
and David Jacobs to account - as something other than friends.
But that ain't gonna happen, not in this lifetime, anyway.

Friends is as friends does, I guess. Meanwhile, accounts of
MJ-12 and alien abductions continue unabated.

While the US goverment covers it all up?

And you people refuse to understand how ridiculous such
assumptions are on their surface?


Disgusted 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:33:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:19:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:51:44 -0000

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 13:26:58 -0400

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>Dick Hall had said to Bob Young:

 >>>So far you have appealed to authority to wipe out the Coyne and
 >>>Cash-Landrum cases, without offering any reasonable explanations
 >>>and without addressing the salient features of the cases.

 >>What did you expect? Do you think a skeptic would be a skeptic
 >>if he had done some minimal research on the subject of UFOs with
 >>minimal scientific reasoning?

 >A true skeptic in the traditional sense would have responded by
 >doing research and applying logic and reason. It is not my
 >expectation that Bob will necessarily behave like a true
 >skeptic. It is my expectation that his (so far) unscientific and
 >illogical approach to UFO cases will be exposed for public
 >examination. Otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time.

Dick:

Regarding your case #13, The Cash Landrum Case, let's address
the illogic of the incident as evidence for an Extraterrestrial
craft:

1) Why would one of the slowest items in our military aircraft
inventory be used to chase a UFO?

2) Where did the 23 helicopters come from? Where were they
based? Who flew them?

3) Where were they going? Betty Cash said they were headed
toward the Houston International airport, less than 15 miles
away. Why did no one at the airport report seeing such a huge
formation of aircraft following the brilliant UFO? 23
helicopters make a lot of racket at 9 P.M.

4) Why would a report from two witnesses, a policeman and his
wife, that they saw some helicopters 4-5 hours later be
considered a confirmation of this UFO report, when they _did
not_ report seeing any UFO? Is this logical?

Cash-Landrum fails because no one has been able to account for
the 23 helicopters, let alone account for the UFO.

Where is the logic in this illogical example of ufology?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:21:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000


 >>>My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >>>evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in this
 >>>article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >>>various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or identical
 >>>to the cases illustrated in this article, are what make the ETH
 >>>the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the present debate,
 >>>I am willing to base my argument on these 18 cases.

 >Exactly what is the difference between "discussing [my]
 >hypothesis" and trying to explain the 18 cases? How can you do
 >one without the other?

If your hypothesis is based upon a falacy, such as an assumption
that the only things that can appear to exhibit the
characteristics you listed in your article are ET craft, then
showing that these things might be characteristics of mundane
objects could show that your hypothesis could be false.

 >You "began the examination of [my] 18 cases" by making a classic
 >appeal to authority. Suppose I were to make a counter-appeal to
 >scientists who do think my cited cases support the ETH. And, by
 >the way, they would be scientists who have _actually_ studied
 >UFO cases.

An appeal to authority would be if I would say, "Menzel said
this, so it _must be true_". If I cited some report or paper of
the good doctor's, this isn't citing authority, it's citing his
research.

If we cannot use any studies or work done by others, what could
there be to debate? You gonna tell me that you personally went
out to Kuwait in '78, before the war, and determined that no
Iraqi reconnaisance aircraft could possibly have been
responsible for that one?

 >The point is that you are citing these scientists as credible
 >authorities (rather than doing your own evaluations), and making
 >a number of dubious assumptions to boot.

What are these dubious assumptions about the validity of the
Sturrock Panel's work or the validity of the data they
considered? We could discuss these dubious assumptions, one at a
time, to see if they stand up to scrutiny.

 >I don't know that the scientists were "handpicked by Peter
 >Sturrock" and they certainly didn't include any UFO believers.

Well, we seem to have something we can mutually agree on: I
don't think there were any UFO skeptics there and you don't
think there were any believers. Maybe the panel was neutral
after all. As to their credibility, as you put it, a couple were
astronomers, one was director of the meteoritics institute at
the University of New Mexico, pretty credible to me.

Oh, I forgot, Dick. You don't think that astronomers know didly
about meteors. Only self-appointed ufologists, I guess, are
credible in determining whether something was a meteor or an
alien spaceship.

 >Nor do I have any reason to beleive that they have _actually_
 >studied _any_ UFO cases on their own. A very short "briefing",
 >disturbingly similar to the Robertson Panel in 1953, in which
 >"science" was subservient to public relations.

Who's public relations effort do you think this was, and what
might have been its purpose?

 >>>Also, you ought to take a look at Bernard Haisch's web
 >>>site that someone posted on this list a while back:
 >>>www.ufoskeptic.org Haisch is a professional astronomer of
 >>>considerable experience who established this site out of concern
 >>>that scientists are too readily and glibly discarding UFO
 >>>reports without proper study.

This is not deferring to "authority"?

<snip>

 >your interpretation here is mightily convenient, while of course
 >ignoring everything else on the Haisch web site (which all
 >observant parties should look at for themselves).

Huh? Richard, you are getting good at changing the subject. You
must be taking lessons from The Master (who's name must not be
spoken - He knows who He is.) What is the point of "everything
else on the Haisch web site", when I was discussing the
information about one of the cases on your list.

When I attempt to discuss the merits of one of your 18 TRUFOS,
you refer me to everything else on this website, except the
part of the site which refers to _your_ incident.

  <snip>

 >>So, to restate my question in my previous post, has any new
 >>evidence for the Coyne and Cash-Landrum cases surfaced since
 >>this 1997 Sturrock Panel study, which concluded (see above) that
 >>these two cases, as well as the others presented, did not
 >>represent evidence for the ETH?

 >You have not offered any convincing explanation of these two
 >cases.

I have proposed a meteor as an explanation for the Coyne
helicopter incident, citing Klass's investigation and early media
interviews with the crew.

 >If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
 >meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
 >states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
 >virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
 >area.

As a matter of fact, only a tiny proportion of fireball meteors
are _reported_ at all. They can be visible over a wide area, if
the sky is clear or dark and they are sufficiently bright and,
but whether anyone happens to be looking at that hour is another
matter.

Of course, if a "UFO" which looks like a meteor is a meteor,
then reports of the "UFO" would qualify as meteor reports,
wouldn't they, whether they were received by those collecting
meteor reports or not?

This is something of a chicken or egg argument, but at least I
can take you to museums where there are hundreds of beautiful
specimens of UFO/meteors. How many ET spaceship/meteors can you
show me, I'm up for a field trip about now.

 >Moving right along--

 >#12, the April 17, 1966 police chase from Ravenna, Ohio to
 >Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

 >The witness, officer Dale Spaur, described the brilliant UFO as
 >disappearing in the morning sky as the Sun rose after the long
 >chase. Many commentators have viewed this last object as very
 >likely the Planet Venus. One view is that the genuine UFO was
 >present during the early part of the incident, but that Venus
 >was seen, and chased, later.

 >One could observe that none of us were there, but the witness
 >was. If the witness misidentified Venus after chasing the
object >for nearly two hours, what would make one thing that the
 >witnesses didn't recognize exactly what they had been chasing
 >for two hours?

 >Huh? What sort of "logic" or "reason" is this? Looks purely
like >sleight-of-hand to me!

No, just two witnesses following what looked like the same thing
they had been following for the last two hours. Gerald Buchert
took a photo of the UFO at Mantua, Ohio, and it turned out to be
Venus.

<snip>

 >what was the object that rose up alongside the road, where the
 >two police officers were investigating an abandoned vehicle, and
 >brightly illuminated them and their patrol car? And when they
 >began chasing this structured, craftlike thing across Ohio and
 >Pennsylvania and several other police officers en route saw both
 >the object at low level and the Ravenna police in hot pursuit,
 >what was that? Venus?

Most likely. It rose up as the Earth turned, was low in the sky
during the "chase" and faded with morning.

 >>To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >>someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >>original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >>unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >>show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >>necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >>more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

 >No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
 >craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
 >this semantical game.

Because you demand that I must present eighteen seperate
proven hypotheses, but you don't have to do the same.

 >You can falsify my hypothesis by offering convincing prosaic or
 >mundane explanations for "my" 18 cases. You are off to a very
 >poor start.

What if I simply concluded that the remaining 16 were
unexplained, because of a lack of information, something which
is likely in some of them.

We would then be faced with the matter of examining your
hypothesis to see if the ETH is the most likely answer. How
would we do that? Can you think of a way that your hypothesis
could be false?

You refuse to even think about it.

Nine physical scientists who reviewed some of the same evidence
are a PR stunt because they didn't find UFOs. When I seek to
discuss facts presented by one of your references for one of
these 18, you accuse me of ignoring all of the "other
information" on the site.

What does other information have to do with the Coyne case?

Hey, it's ufology, I guess.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:44:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:22:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:40:32 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100

 >Two more reasons I am not a pelicanist: (1) I don't have to use
 >exclamation points without justification. (2) I don't have to
 >pretend to know things about people I've never met. Does anybody
 >who has ever spent more than five minutes talking with me think
 >I don't have a sense of humor?

Jerry:

Back during the review on these pages of the Trent photo
contest, you admitted to not knowing Paul Trent, but said that
he was either "diabolical" or "stupid, lazy and unimaginative"
and so couldn't possibly have been bright enough to fake them.

Were you just yukking it up?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:58:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:23:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:26:41 -0400

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >And if we're going to talk about things Haisch links to without
 >comment, one of them is Marcello Truzzi's essay, 'On
 >Pseudo-Skepticism', which wouldn't make Bob Young and other
 >skeptics here happy. Here's one short excerpt:

<snip>

 >"Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call
 >themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden
 >of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be
 >appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic. A result of
 >this is that many critics seem to feel it is only necessary to
 >present a case for their counter-claims based upon plausibility
 >rather than empirical evidence."

This is a good point, but it also applies to the pro ETH crowd.
Mysteries, by their nature, don't carry much of their own
empirical evidence around, or leave it laying around after they
have left. If they did, they would probably be IFOs.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 01:02:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:24:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 17:11:03 -0400

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:07:26 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >But if I _were_ arguing the merits, I wouldn't be required to
 >provide a list of things that could have happened. Nor is anyone
 >else who considers the case. First the facts, then the theories.
 >Your basic theory here seems to be that nothing unknown could
 >have happened, because you can't imagine what it could be. If
 >you'll agree to that, we can stop this nonsense.

No, actually, my basic theory here is that it was a meteor.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                       New Articles At The Lost Haven

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 06:35:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:27:09 -0400
Subject: New Articles At The Lost Haven


Dear Colleagues,

I have uploaded new articles to my web site, which you can find
at the following links:


http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/A70revisit.html

This is an excellent article written by Brian Allan of S.P.I.
Scotland. A revisit of the well known A7O case.


http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Vimanas.html

Since Colin wrote his last article for the lost haven, he
informs me that he has had quite a few e-mails from many parts
of the world, lets hope this new article gets him just as many
questions, and feedback.


http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Rosslyn.html

Brian Allan of S.P.I. takes a look at a small Midlothian Chapel,
which over time has had it's fair share of Paranormal activity!

Also I would like to congratulate Marc Bell of WUFORG for
winning April's UFO Quiz. It does seem that The Lost Haven quiz
has become very popular with people. Marc will be receiving his
book prize within the week.

For your chance at winning this month's UFO quiz simply click
below.

http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/UFOQuiz.html


Best Regards,

Roy Hale

Down To Earth Magazine on the Net
http://www.thelosthaven.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:06:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:30:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Velez


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 07:45:30 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Greer On Bell

 >>>Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
 >>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >>>Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>>FWIW, Greer is on Bell tonight.

 >>I heard parts and pieces of the Greer interview on Art Bell on
 >>my way home Friday nite.

Hi Steve, Larry, Ron, All,

Larry wrote:

 >>I cannot begin to recall the dizzying assertions, theories and
 >>all which came out of the tired old loudspeaker in my 1979
 >>Oldsmobile.

Yeah, like the one he told me about how our o secret division in
our own military was responsible for 98% of all the reported
abductions. Information he told he had received from a high
ranking Pentagon official which (of course) he was unable to
identify. What you heard on the radio is just "e pluribus unem."
(one of/from many.) The guy sets off my BS alarms _every_time_
he opens his mouth.

 >>One upshot is that some previously secret insiders will reveal
 >>that the USA (and perhaps other nations) have been blasting
 >>alien space-ships out of our skies in recent times.

Is there no 'beginning' to the intelligence of our world
leaders? <LOL> (if such a thing is true!)

 >>Like the old preacher said: "You baffles them with BS, you takes
 >>their money, and gets the @#$% out of town kid!"

<LOL>

Steve wrote:

 >I've spoken with some who believe this will be the beginning of
 >the end for UFO secrecy. I would like to hope that is true, but
 >have my doubts.

I agree Steve. It would be nice to think that this is going to
make a difference. Somehow I doubt it. Why the Hell should the
gubbamint suddenly do a 180 on a policy that it has staunchly
maintained for at least a half a century? Because Greer serves
them a few watercress sandwiches? I don't think so.

What is needed is a _grass roots_ popular movement for
disclosure. Not this 'solo flight' disguising as a 'mandate from
the people' that Greer has engineered. He set up a three ring
circus with himself as the "Ringmaster." Politicians respond to
money and votes. (In that order) When the demand for disclosure
comes from a statistically significant number of 'voters' they
will get off the dime. Not until then. This 'show' that Greer
has contrived will serve no one but himself.

 >If anyone has any leads as to who will be attending the VIP
 >Luncheon or meetings on Capitol Hill, I would be most
 >interested.

Somebody else asked, and I'd like to reiterate the question,
"Where is the $$$ for all this coming from?" This little side
show has got to cost a bundle to produce. There is 'serious
money' behind this somewhere.

I wonder where it comes from.


Regards to All,

John Velez


                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:23:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:41:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Velez


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 07:45:30 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Greer On Bell

 >>>Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 19:08:14 -0400
 >>>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >>>Subject: Speaking Of Aquatic UFOs...
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>>FWIW, Greer is on Bell tonight.

 >>I heard parts and pieces of the Greer interview on Art Bell on
 >>my way home Friday nite.

Hi Steve, Larry, Ron, All,

Larry wrote:

 >>I cannot begin to recall the dizzying assertions, theories and
 >>all which came out of the tired old loudspeaker in my 1979
 >>Oldsmobile.

Yeah, like the one he told me about how a "secret" division in
our own military was responsible for 98% of all the reported
abductions. Information he told he had received from a high
ranking Pentagon official which, (of course) he was unable to
identify. What you heard on the radio is just "e pluribus unem."
(one of/from many.) The man sets off my BS alarms _every_time_
he opens his mouth.

 >>One upshot is that some previously secret insiders will reveal
 >>that the USA (and perhaps other nations) have been blasting
 >>alien space-ships out of our skies in recent times.

Is there no 'beginning' to the intelligence of our world
leaders? <LOL> (if such a thing is true!)

 >>Like the old preacher said: "You baffles them with BS, you takes
 >>their money, and gets the @#$% out of town kid!"

<LOL>

Steve wrote:

 >I've spoken with some who believe this will be the beginning of
 >the end for UFO secrecy. I would like to hope that is true, but
 >have my doubts.

I agree Steve. It would be nice to think that this is going to
make a difference. Somehow I doubt it. Why the Hell should the
gubbamint suddenly do a 180 on a policy that it has so staunchly
maintained for half a century or more? Because Greer serves them
watercress sandwiches at a VIP luncheon? I don't think so.

Unless he has some rock solid cases to present, the press is
going to have a field day debunking it while setting ufology
back 20 years. According to what I've heard from Jan and some
others about the material he plans to present, setting ufology
back is precisely what will happen. As I mentioned before, that
may in fact be the 'purpose' of the whole exercise.

What is needed is a _grass roots_ popular movement for
disclosure. Not this 'solo flight' disguising as a 'mandate from
the people' that Greer has engineered. He set up a three ring
circus with himself as the "Ringmaster." Politicians respond to
$$$ and votes. In that order. Not to "personalities." This whole
thing is a 'personality driven' venture _for_ Greer.

 >If anyone has any leads as to who will be attending the VIP
 >Luncheon or meetings on Capitol Hill, I would be most
 >interested.

Somebody else asked, and I'd like to reiterate the question,
"Where is the $$$ for all this coming from?" This little side
show has got to cost a bundle to produce. There is 'serious
money' behind this somewhere. I wonder where it originates.


Regards to All,

John Velez


                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                 Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 05:38:41 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:07:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductions And Dead Relatives? - Aubeck


 >From: Jesus Millan Arias <jesusmillan@eresmas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Abductions And Dead Relatives?
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:32:56 +0200


 >Hi,

 >I have a question for anyone on this very interesting List.

 >Please, can anyone tell me if really are related "Abductions"
 >with "presence of dead relatives"?. Some researchers, as
 >Freixedo, say really both are related, but I haven't found any
 >reference in my David Jacobs books.


 >Thank you,

 >Jesus Millan


Hi Jess,

Let me answer your questions as best as I can, but I don't have
my notes with me so I can't give you exact page references right
now. Nevertheless, do write to me in a week or so if you'd like
one.

1) The connection between apparitions of the dead and 'aliens'
is well established. You can look at this from different angles:

a)Ghosts And Aliens. Reported ghosts often share similar
attributes to alleged aliens. Sometimes a ghost that may have
been an alien is identified erroneously with a deceased person.
Sometimes ghosts appear to behave as aliens are thought to do.
And in 'primitive' communities no difference is made between the
two kinds of entities, so ghosts often play the part of
abductor, etc. This is even said to lead to 'hybrid' births in
some cases.

b)Aliens As Ancestors. Just as the dead from long ago are said
to return and haunt the living, many people suggest we are the
descendants of the aliens.

c)Aliens Adopting Guises. It has been found that aliens
often adopt the form of deceased (and living) relatives
during an abduction, either as a test or as a means of
pacifying the abductee.

2)This concept of "the dead among the visitors" can be found in
fairy and demon lore, not to mention the obvious... vampire
lore!

3)Jacobs mentions the adoption of this kind of 'disguise'during
abductions in his book The Threat.

This is a generous statement coming from someone so rigid in his
ways! But Strieber's Breakthrough and Transformation should also
be consulted. (I am sure WS drew this idea from fairy
mythology.) And check out The Communion Letters, too.


I'd just like to add that I don't want to get into a debate
about this subject with anyone who thinks I personally swallow
all of this. These are just the observations of a
U.F.Folklorist.

Hope this helps, Jess!

Chris Aubeck








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 11:51:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:10:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500


Hi Jerry,

OK you've got a sense of humour, you've convinced me.

Unfortunately, I don't listen to Canadian radio (?), so I have
to rely on what I see you churning out here day after day.

It must have been what is known as a "radical misperception" on
my part.

Surely only someone with a wicked of humour could proclaim its
existence in public, then pick someone up on the use of grammar
in the same paragraph.

 >Better that than acknowledge that you may be wrong, I'm sure. In
 >any event, I can only dream of matching the condescension skills
 >of the typical British pelicanist. Maybe if I started attending
 >your Donald Menzel Appreciation Society meetings.....

I'm more than happy to acknowledge that I _may_ be wrong.

In fact, I would like to be proved wrong, who would not want to
see proof that we are not alone?

But it's down to what constitutes evidence - some people have
different thresholds, and I guess mine are set pretty high (but
not as high as our dear friend Dr Menzel).

Now Jerry, how many of your friends would be as willing to
accept the proposition that they _may_equally_ be wrong?

With so many versions of 'believer' ufology to choose from, they
can't all be right.

Take your 'UFO Encyclopedia' for instance - of all the hundreds
of cases and reports detailed, _some_ of these must be hoaxes
and misidentifications.

Surely it is in your own interests that ET does not land on the
White House lawn, because if this should happen perhaps 99
percent of the material in your book would be revealed as
nothing but wishful thinking.

Ponder on that one for a while.


Dave Clarke










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        S.I.B. Announces Project COTA

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 06:53:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:16:28 -0400
Subject: S.I.B. Announces Project COTA


Project C.O.T.A. Catalog of Anomalous Tronco-Conical Objects

An Open Letter Addressed to the International UFO Community


Dear Friends:

The Sociedad de Investigaciones Biofsicas has embarked upon a
cataloging project fora ll UFO incidents involving conical,
tronco-conical or pyramidal objects. The goal ist to establish a
database that is as thorough as possible for this type of unique
object as an initial step in determining behavior and shape
patterns. To do this, it is necessary to secure the cooperation
of the greatest number of UFO organizations around the planet.

I am therefore humbly requesting that you scan your files in
seach of this type of case. Should you find any case you have
researched yourself, or for which you have adequate references,
please contact me at my personal address:
unicornio@supercable.es

The S.I.B. shall post a public list featuring those
organizations who have collaborated with the project, providing
credit in each instance, of course, to the original researcher
or organization.

We would like to convey the urgent need of making this a joint
effort in order to succeed in our task and assembling the pieces
of this jigsaw puzzle. Likewise, if you know of any UFO
organization which could be interested in this endeavor, I ask
that you submit this e-mail message to them. Below you will find
the project guidelines. The information collected shall be
published, as always, at the S.I.B.'s website.

With best regards to all,

Antonio Salinas Secretary, Sociedad de Investigaciones
Biofsicas Director, Departament of Ufology/Exobiology
http://listen.to/sib


  1.- Project Justification

One of the main problems in UFO research is the variety of
objects to be studied. It is very hard to establish a coherent
base in the statistical and analytical studies if we insist on
including, within the same table, objects and structures which
could correspond to different designs, sources and natures. It
therefore becomes necessary to conduct studies centered in
specific areas, in which each area of study could address a
different aspect of the phenomenon.

Specifically, the tronco-conical objects reported on numerous
occasions by eyewitnesses from all over the world provide the
following points of interest:

1. On numerous occasions there have been reports of landings or
quasi-landings by these structures. Therefore, the sightings
tend to be close at hand and provide a great deal of information
for the researchers. 2. Their shape could be considered
"unusual" within the context of the UFO culture. By this we mean
that a malicious eyewitness bent on hoaxing a UFO sighting would
normally abide by the disk-shaped configurations of the UFO
phenomenon. Thus, it is easier that a case involving a
tronco-conical structure be considered as genuine. 3. A
preliminary study of certain cases involving sightings of
tronco-conical objects has enabled the location of certain
common patters of great ineterest. This fact has been one of the
main reasons for spearheading Project COTA in the hopes that a
repetition of said patterns in other cases may be found, or that
common patterns may be determined.

2.- Goals

Project C.O.T.A.'s goal is the cataloging and systematic
analyisis of those UFO sightings in which tronco-conical,
conical or pyramidal structures are reported, whether these
sightings are NL/DD, CE-I, CE-II, CE-III or CE-IV. Conical
structures and pyramidal structures are also included by virtue
of being relatively similar, and given the possibility that a
witness might mistake one for the other. However, the project
shall insure to make distinctions between one shape and another.
Once the conclusions are analyzed, if any are indeed reached,
they shall be made public to the UFO community.


  3.- Phases

1.- Database creation. The C.O.T.A. database (COTACAT) shall
include fields which are common to toher UFO databases, but
shall further study the creations of fields specific to this
type of sighting. Although COTACAT shall at first be managed
privately by the Sociedad de Investigaciones Biofisicas
(S.I.B.), consideration will be given to making it public in the
future.

2.- Location of archival or bibiliographic references regarding
this type of incident.

3.- Location of the original sources of these references in
order to increase scientific data which has not been contributed
to the archival documents.

4.- Location of new references by means of contacts with
national or international research organizations.

5.- Search for common paterns through the use of statistical
tools. This is the core of Project C.O.T.A., but we may only
reach it after having collected the amount of information
necessary to this effect.

6.- Publication of results. The Sociedad de Investigaciones
Biofsicas shall publish its findings on its website or any
other method which allows the information to be maede known to
the UFO Community


  4.- Coordination

Project C.O.T.A. has been created and is managed by the
Sociedad de Investigaciones Biofsicas. More information on our
organization can be found at http://listen.to/sib.

The project's coordinator is Oscar A. Rodrguez Baquero,
Representative of the S.I.B. in thea Province of Cdiz and a
specialist in aerospace subjects.

The S.I.B. shall keep a catalogue of the soruces consulted and
of those organizations who have offered their support by sharing
their resources or any other helpful information.

  5.- Useful Addresses

Web Site for S.I.B. : http://listen.to/sib E-mail for S.I.B.:
sib@listen.to E-mail for Oscar A. Rodriguez Baquero (Project
COTA coordinator): baquero@sibbetelgeuse.zzn.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        Nothing New Under The Sun...

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:17:55 -0400
Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...


UpDaters may be amused by the following item, unearthed when I
was browsing through the slowly fossilising layers of
prehistoric magazines at Magonia Towers:

 From Flying Saucer Review, volume one, number four,
September-October 1955.

"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
of UFO reports.

"In Los Angeles there were dozens of reports of three silvery
disc-shaped objects that 'changed formation as if playing tag
in the sky', and appeared to be 'leaping over each other'. A
squadron of jets went up to search for the objects, but returned
unsuccessful.

"It was suggested at first that they were weather baloons, but
the Weather Bureau reported that no balloons were aloft. Then
came the final explanation - the objects were inland pelicans!"

Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.

--

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:19:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:21:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600

 >>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:14:57 -0400
 >>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"

 >Dear Kelly, EBK and Listers,

 >Normally, I wouldn't respond to this type of post. However, much
 >of the posted article had to do with Guy Malone's ministry and
 >his perception of ETs as "fallen angels", and your perception,
 >Kelly, of ETs as "spirits". You may both be correct. I think
 >not.

Unless I've been writing in my sleep, I don't recall responding
to this article - I just sent it to Errol and he posted it. I'm
really swamped with work and family matters at the moment, so I
am terribly behind on reading my email.

However, to clarify for Sue and other UFO UpDates reader and
writers, I would like to say that I have sent in a couple of
articles that have examined UFOs from a Christian perspective
for one reason: suddenly I am finding them popping up on the
internet, which interests me. It seems like UFOs are becoming a
perhaps 'hot' Christian topic and I thought from an intellectual
viewpoint that might interest people on this List. Just because
I send in an article doesn't mean I agree with it. I personally
have no idea what UFOs are.

 >>...says Malone. "All I remember is that there are several instances
 >>in my childhood that were very scary in some instances in which
 >>I was visited or taken by other beings. When I was 20 I owned up
 >>to the fact."

 >Note: "All I remember..." If Guy Malone cannot consciously
 >recall _most_ of what happened to him during his abductions, I
 >don't think he should be trusted as to his conclusions about
 >same, do you? And, I can assure you, "spirits" don't burn holes
 >through flesh to the bone with laser beams, Kelly. I have the
 >proof. I bear the scars.

I am sure that there are many priests and theologians who would
disagree if by "spirits" you mean demons. Demons are considered
to be "Fallen Angels" and hence supernatural entities capable of
great deception and violence. They can even imitate good angles
and even imitate Christ. The Church always talks about using
'discernment' when confronted with the miraculous in case it
turns out to be a deception.

Christianity is an old religion based on a supernatural event -
the resurrection of Christ and Jesus himself performed many
miracles. So it has surprised me somewhat that it has taken this
long to see articles on UFOs from a Christian perspective.

 >Don't you think that those of us who have been experiencers have
 >asked similar questions of our abductors? No one wants to hear
 >the answers, because as John Velez mentioned, the answers don't
 >fit most peoples' preconceived ideas about what or how we think
 >aliens should act or behave.

I should also point out that articles that I have read recently
(I think I posted them here too) state that the Church (or
high-ranking members of it, at least) believe that aliens may
actually come from other worlds and that this would just further
add to the glory of God. It also raises many interesting
theological questions.

 >It does no good to assume that what you experience(d) as an
 >abductee is innately evil. The beings are _not_ perfect, no more
 >than "we" are perfect. What you assume when you assume "they"
 >should act thus-and-so, is to voice your wish that these beings
 >(because they are technologically superior) must _also_ meet
 >your need for perfection emotioanlly and psychologically (i.e.
 >act as gods: be consistently loving, kind, giving, honest,
 >positively intervening, etc.). Otherwise they would not behave
 >inconsistently, would not lie, would not hurt you, would not
 >rape, would not fail to intervene when needed, etc. In other
 >words, they would _not_ act human.

Ah, then the Church would view those aliens as "fallen" beings
in the same manner that humans are fallen. These are the
scenarios I find interesting from an intellectual point of view
- if the aliens haven't fallen they would be living in a state
of grace in paradise. If they have fallen, they would need
Christ the Redeemer.

There is a very interesting novel called "The Sparrow" written
on this concept (sorry my library is packed away at the moment
and can't remember the author's name) of humans discovering an
alien race on another planet. The first organization to send a
mission to the planet are the Jesuits.

 >Despite what Guy Malone thinks, "they" do not profess to be
 >gods, and they do not call us gods. They do not believe Jesus is
 >the Son of God, nor do they understand the Trinity... Father,
 >Son and Holy Ghost. But, they do believe in an Almighty Creator
 >of the Universe (not them and not us), and quote; "We value
 >life, all life."

 >They _are_ concerned that we perceive them with respect, not
 >reverance, and that we understand we are special to them and to
 >the well-being of the universe. How, I have no idea. Your guess
 >is as good as mine. Why me? I don't know, and frankly, I don't
 >give a _hit why. Whatever their motives for abducting me, unless
 >they give back to me some measure of what they have taken, I'll
 >never be able to forgive them. God can do that if He wants to
 >when they die. They aren't perfect. Period. Remember that. They
 >do care deeply. Remember that. They are not innately evil, but
 >they may appear to be just as "fallen" as we are. Know that.

Thanks for the interesting post Sue. If sending these articles
on UFOs and religion bother people I won't send anymore. As a
fortean, I am interested in many fields and two which intrigue
me most are UFOs and religion. When I find articles discussing
both of them together it interests me. No offence was intended.


Kelly









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 12:03:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:24:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:07:20 +0100


 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:39:55 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>It is difficult to walk the fine line between the two
 >>"traditions" (all sightings explainable vs some not explainable)
 >>without getting vociferous arguments from whichever side you are
 >>discussing. Hard nosed skeptics/scoffers/debunkers find it
 >>unbelieveably illogical to BELIEVE that there could be any
 >>sightings that couldn't be explained in conventional terms.
 >>Their ultimate resort is that "there will be unexplained
 >>sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
 >>not enough information to form a conclusion." To this the
 >>skeptics from the other side argue that there are sightings
 >>which have more than enough credible information for explanation
 >>or identification, but the information in the sighting report
 >>contradicts all conventional explanations.

 >>And, it would seem, never the twain shall meet!

 >Thanks for your thoughtful, erudite response. At least someone
 >has taken the trouble to read what I have been saying rather
 >than jumping to conclusions.

 >At the end of the day, I'll have to lay my cards on the table
 >and go with your group who say "there will be unexplained
 >sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
 >not enough information to form a conclusion."

<snip>

 >I'd never rule out the possibility that some of these
 >unexplained cases could be/were extraterrestrial visitations;
 >but to me, there is no evidence. Until there is, I'll stick with
 >the "case not proven."

I have no problem with the "Case Not Proven" as long as one
isn't effectively disparaging the witness' credibility or
ignoring important points of the testimony. IT is evident to
"pro" ufologists with experience in science when a case has
Insufficient Information to prove one way or the other. HEnce I
like to go for the high risk, high payoff" cases in which it at
least seems that there should be enough information to identify
whatever caused the sighting. The McMinnville case seems that
way to me... no chance of a misidentification or delusion. Hence
it is either a hoax or the real thing.

The skeptic can argue hoax, but then the question arises, is
there enough evidence to "prove" a hoax? If you are trying to
prove a hoax you have to conclude Insufficient Information. ON
the other hand, if you accept the ineherent credibility of the
Trents themselves, as do I, there is evidence to reject the
hoax.

In the Japan Airlines case recently mentioned in Kean's article
on pilot sightings (discussed on this list), you have zero
liklihood of a hoax.

Klass implied there was enough information for identification
when he claimed the crew saw Jupiter and Mars. However, the same
sources of information (the pilot and crew) saw these objects
appear first one above the other and then reorient to side by
side. I claim (with some justification) that this is SUfficient
Information to reject the Mars/Jupiter Candidate Explanatory
Hypothesis. Then Klass changed his mind: it was moonlight
reflected on clouds. The CEH conflicts with the further
descriptions by the witnesses (yellow lights like one might see
in oncoming aircraft windows; bursts or light from "exhaust
ports" feeling heat on the face from the objects, etc.). I claim
this is Sufficient Information to reject the second Klassic CEH.

If at this point the skeptic say, well, there is still
Insufficient Information to conclude that the sighting can't be
explained I would have to ask, how much do you need? Note that I
did NOT mention the ETH; I did not say "There is Insufficient
INformation to prove ET's were involved." This is because I
would have to agree, if this were the only unexplained sighting,
that by itself it wouldn't prove the ETH.

I would argue that the information is sufficient to prove it
can't be identified with any conventional; phenomenon.

The problem I have with superskeptics/debunkers/scoffers is that
you can never get point where they agree that a particular case
can't be explained in conventional terms. The OTHER problem I
have is that the "worst" of them go public with explanations
that don't make any sense in the context if the sighting
information (e.g. Mars and Jupiter) and, of course, the press
sucks it up.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                         Corso's FBI Files Revisited

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 10:48:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:29:45 -0400
Subject: Corso's FBI Files Revisited


Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
By Ed Gehrman

Blunders do not make a hoaxer or a liar. Col. Corso would have
to be both if he didn't seed alien technology into US business,
as he says he did. The Day After Roswell is about that fact and
is not intended as a history of the cold war and shouldn't be
read in that way. It comes down to whether you believe he was
trying to tell the truth, not whether he produced a mistake-free
document.

Col. Corso's testimony is primary source material and should be
treated as such, just as we use diaries and old letters to
understand the dynamics of the Civil War. There's absolutely no
reason to believe that Col. Corso is a liar.

He may have make numerous mistakes, but his testimony concerning
the seeding of alien technology is a lie or it's the truth. It
is certainly not a "mistake". Was he telling the truth about
that or wasn't he? If he wasn't, then he's a liar and a fake.
It's that issue that we all need to wrestle with. It's not
enough to insist that he made some mistakes, therefore he
shouldn't be believed. The mistakes have become red herrings
pulled across our path to distract us from the important
information Col.Corso has bravely given us.

I have no proof that Col. Corso is telling the truth other than
my knowledge that he was an honorable and truthful person, a
super patriot and well respected by his peers. He has no history
of being deceitful or of perpetrating hoaxes. He held
responsible positions in the service of our country and was a
good friend and advisor to some of the most important and
powerful people in the country from 1945 on the present.

By all accounts he was fair, scrupulously honest and an all
around good Joe. When he states that our government has seeded
alien technology into the US business community and that he
should know because he was the person who accomplished the task,
I believe him. He had no reason to lie and there is no evidence
that he has done so in the past.

Lately the " evidence" pushing Col. Corso's character
assassination along is his newly released FBI files. Below
you'll find Larry Bryant's rendition of those files and my reply
to his assertions. I hope readers will see the problems with
Bryant's arguments and perhaps take another look at Col. Corso's
claims.




Colonel Philip J. Corso & the FBI
The Love-Hate Relationship between Whistle blower
Philip J. Corso andthe Federal Bureau of Investigation:
  by Larry W. Bryant

Sometimes, in order to illuminate a shadowy issue in
contemporary history, the chief principal of that issue must
himself pass into history -- by dying. Such is the case with the
late U.S. Army Lt. Col. (Ret.) Philip J. Corso, co-author of
"The Day After Roswell." His demise on July 16, 1998, served to
pave the way for public access to any and all investigatory
records maintained on him by such agencies as the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency. Were he
alive today, however, Corso probably would be inclined to
protect his privacy by denying that access (especially were he
to have any reason for suspecting the existence of derogatory
information).


My reply:

Bryant has no idea how Col. Corso would have reacted if asked
permission to search his files. He probably would have been as
curious as anyone is about their files. I'm sure he would have
wanted the chance to respond to Bryant's interpretations. Most
of the material contained in these files is set in the context
of the Warren Commission and Col. Corso's involvement then as an
investigator for Senator Russell of Georgia, the Chairman of the
Armed Services Committee which oversaw the CIA. Taken out of
that historical context, the files are meaningless but worse
than that, are apt to give deceptive information and leave an
inaccurate impression.

Col. Corso served 21 years in the Army, was Commander of an Air
Defense Battalion in Europe, and had been awarded the Legion of
Merit and other commendations. To vilify a person's life and
career through shallow interpretations of forty seven pages of
FBI dossier is in my opinion a travesty of justice.

Bryant continues:


But since dead men have little or no privacy interests, Corso's
behind-the-scenes profile gets the spotlight in the February
2000 release of his 47-page F.B.I. dossier. That release, by the
way, comes many months after my initial freedom-of-information
request sent to F.B.I. headquarters in Washington. In various,
liberally censored inter-office memoranda -- some classified
originally as high as SECRET -- certain top F.B.I. officials
manage to depict poor put-upon Phil as an "unreliable" and
"shifty-eyed" McCarthy-esque crusader against communist
influence in society. Even director J. Edgar Hoover chose to
label the would-be savior of the Republic a "rat."


My reply:

There are forty seven pages of material in these files but
Bryant chooses to quote only three words: "unreliable",
"shifty-eyed"....and "rat". Does that tell us something about
where Bryant's article is headed? But it is significant that
these inter-office memorandums are classified as SECRET. Why so
if Col. Corso was so unimportant? And what is wrong with being a
crusader against communist influence? Wasn't that the major job
of the FBI back then? To keep the "Reds" out of positions of
influence? Col. Corso, along with many of his friends were
trying to tell folks in positions of power that the communists
had infiltrated the CIA and they suspected the same thing had
happened to the FBI. They were correct about CIA moles but were
probably wrong about the FBI which had been mainly compromised
by the Mafia and the CIA.


Bryant continues:

What on earth (or beyond Earth) had prompted such official
condemnation?

It takes a couple of read-through's to sort out the trail of
activities and proclivities that, in Bureau executive C.
D.DeLoach's view, show how Corso "had maligned his own
character" (rather than its being intentionally maligned by the
Bureau, as charged by then-Congressman Michael Feighan
(D-Ohio)). The memos' style and content rely on redundancy to
drive home the undesirability and unreliability of having to
deal in any way with the likes of Corso. Even Corso's old boss
at the Pentagon -- Lt. Gen.. Arthur Trudeau -- gets tarnished
(in a few offhand references) by the Corso tar baby. Curiously,
the memos start out with the date of Nov. 10, 1964, and extend
into April 1966; a few documents skip from 1966 to 1990 (namely,
a "congressional" pertaining to Corso's forwarding of a
"Reader's Digest" article on weaponry). The file ends with the
1990correspondence. Some of the F.B.I.-redacted material has
been referred to this or that (unnamed) agency for release
determination.


My reply:

First it's important to understand who C. DeLoach was. Cartha
DeLoach was an aide to J. Edgar and was used by Hoover for
special assignments. An example is his leadership of a team of
FBI agents and wire tappers to the 1964 Democratic convention
site in Atlantic City. Arthur Schlesinger wrote about the event:
"The ostensible purpose was to gather intelligence.. 'concerning
matters of strife, violence,etc.' The real purpose according to
William Sullivan of the FBI was to gather information useful to
President Johnson, particularly in bottling up Robert Kennedy-
that is, in reporting on the activities of Bobby
Kennedy...DeLoach instructed...that the FBI squad was not to be
disclosed to the Secret Service and especially not to the
Attorney General( Bobby Kennedy was the USAG at that time)." If
DeLoach were sent to investigate someone like Col. Corso, then
that was an important assignment, handed to him directly by
Hoover. This means that Hoover was concerned. Corso was a
serious player. These files prove that, once and for all.


Bryant continues:

Now, let's see if I can construct a passable precis of the
dossier -- by excerpting some chronological quotes and by
appending some commentary: First, from a Feb. 11, 1965, memo
from M. A. Jones to Mr. DeLoach: "Bu files contain a number of
references to Corso, although we have never investigated him.
[Two deleted lines of type.]. He has contacted the FBI from time
to time, especially in the 1940s, usually in connection with
some allegation concerning the subversive activity of one
individual or another." [Next follows a page worth of redacted
paragraphs.] Then: "Corso was also alleged to be responsible for
putting out a rumor that Lee Harvey Oswald was an FBI informant.
When interviewed on 2-10-64, by you (Mr. DeLoach) regarding
this, Corso indicated his 'sources in CIA had merely presumed
that Oswald was an informant for the FBI.' When you challenged
him to identify his CIA sources, Corso repeatedly failed to
produce names. There is good reason to believe Corso never got
such information from CIA and the 'deductions' were his own. The
Director noted: 'Corso is a rat.'


My reply:

Bryant makes this very confusing. First of all DeLoach must have
requested the material about Col. Corso from Jones and this was
Jones's reply to him. Something had piqued DeLoach's interest (a
complaint from Congressman Feighan which I'll touch on later) or
he wouldn't have requested the information. The 1940's reference
to Col. Corso's reporting of subversives was something that
could have been expected from an intelligence officer working
directly with subversives on a day to day basis. The communist
threat was much different then. Col. Corso and his friends and
commanders were all worried that the "Reds", assisted by
assorted pinkos, were about to take over the world.

Then Jones goes on to remind DeLoach what he had said about
Corso and how the director (Hoover) had called him a rat.

We now know that Col. Corso's informant in the CIA was Frank
Hand. They had worked together before; Hand was also the aide to
Edward Lansdale's operation Mongoose which tried to disrupt the
Cuban revolution through a strategy of directly sabotaging the
sugar crop, oil refineries and copper mines, etc. We also now
know that the FBI's connections to Oswald were very suspicious.
Oswald had been in contact with the FBI on more than one
occasion and Col. Corso had been informed of this by Frank Hand.
Of course Col. Corso would not have given the name of his
informant to the FBI. Does it make sense that he would?


Bryant continues:

"The interview with Corso took place in Senator Thurmond's
office, in the presence of the Senator's Administrative and
Legislative Assistants, [deleted] and [deleted]. Corso
repeatedly refused to identify his alleged CIA sources and,
after you kept pressing him on this point, he modified his story
by saying a Communist Party member in Texas named [deleted] knew
Oswald had been the source of FBI information and [deleted] had
been spreading this story around. When you told Corso he was
inconsistent in his story, he got very melodramatic about his
fear the communists were promoting a deliberate smear of the
FBI.


My reply:

Col Corso seems only to be protecting the identity of his
informant. The melodrama was probably a sincere desire to
convince DeLoach that the FBI was being smeared. For the last
year Col. Corso had been working as Senator Russell's aide,
investigating the possibility that Castro was somehow involved
in the assassination of Kennedy. Russell was sure that this was
the case, but was unable to change the tide of events. Oswald
had been selected as the lone killer and nothing else would be
acceptable to those in power. This of course was an abomination
to Col. Corso who was a true believer, of the rightwing
persuasion. As it turns out, he was probably correct in his
assessment of the situation.


Bryant continues:

"Oddly enough, when you met with Senator Eastland and [deleted]
on 2-6-64, about this matter, the Senator, in [deleted]
presence, told you that the latter's source said Oswald was
being handled as an FBI informant by a Special Agent named
[deleted]. Later, [deleted] identified his source to you as
Corso. (There is a [deleted] on the Reserve Index, Section B, of
the San Antonio Office.) "From your interview with Corso on
2-10-64, you got the definite impression that he was a rather
shifty-eyed individual who fancied himself a great intelligence
expert. It was difficult for you to pin him down and he
continually insisted on expounding his theories in preference to
sticking to facts. In spite of the fact Corso promised to call
you on 2-11-64, relative to the identity of his sources, he did
not do so. When you reached him that evening he said he had not
had an opportunity to recontact his sources. He then stressed
his sources had no facts but that their belief Oswald was an FBI
informant merely stemmed from idle deduction during a
conversation. He said he was responsible for leading this
discussion in this regard because of his extensive experiences
with military intelligence; he felt than [sic] any American
citizen who was given a job in the Soviet Union, allowed to
marry a Soviet citizen and then permitted to return with her to
the U.S., could only be an FBI or CIA informant. He indicated
neither he nor his CIA sources had any facts on which to base
these deductions. He again promised to contact you within 3
days. When you had no word from him by 2-25-64, you contacted
Corso again. Claiming to have been traveling with Senator
Thurmond, Corso apologized for not getting in touch with you as
he had promised. He again refused to disclose his so-called CIA
sources, and again emphasized the fact that his allegations had
been strictly deductions and had no basis in fact. You told him
this was a pretty poor way of doing business, especially for a
man who supposedly had been trained in intelligence operations,
and you advised him of the tremendous amount of work his gossip
had caused the FBI. His reply was to invite you to lunch. This
was refused. (105-82555-2274,2275,2276)" [LWB comment: At this
point, readers may recall the rumor circulating during Corso's
extra "15 minutes of fame" in the aftermath of his Roswell
tell-all tome -- that he (with a co-author?) was planning to do
another, comparable expose, to be titled "The Day After
Dallas."]


My reply:

There's certainly nothing damaging here unless putting someone
off, who you don't want to talk with, is a serious crime. It's
clear that Col. Corso is avoiding DeLoach. He was not about to
give up his informant and that's that. But the comment: "its a
pretty poor way of doing business" is ridiculous. What would
DeLoach have expected from Col. Corso? Hand was a CIA operative
; Col. Corso had been the military Operations Coordinating
Board's delegate to the CIA group planning the 1954 Guatemalan
coup. He and Corso had discussed the serious connections between
Oswald, the FBI and the Cuban government. Corso probably didn't
know what to think or who to trust, certainly not the FBI who
had at first denied any connection to Oswald but then had to
admit that Oswald had contacted one their agents, James Hosty.
What would you have done under those life and death
circumstances? This was a matter of a presidential assassination
and some factions within the government were seriously worried
about a coup.


Bryant continues:

The most Corso-image-damaging datum contained in the 8-page Jones memo
gives us an amusing glimpse of how Murphy's Law operates in Washington
(or is it the Keystone Cops Law?):

"On 10-30-64, [deleted], [the associate commissioner of the]
Immigration and Naturalization Service, advised the Bureau that
an employee of his had found a carbon copy of a letter on the
streets of Capitol Hill addressed to the Director and dated
10-28-64. This communication signed by Philip J. Corso, Research
Assistant to Senator Strom Thurmond, alleged that Mr. Hoover or
the FBI was being used to follow up leads derived from illegal
telephone monitoring of calls from Senator Thurmond's office.
The letter indicated a hoax call was made and recorded to
determine if the Bureau was involved and being used as a
political tool by the present Administration. Corso said this
incident, which he did not identify, was particularly appalling
since you (Mr. DeLoach) had personally assured him no phones on
Capitol Hill were ever illegally monitored. Corso said it was
obvious that you were lying. "On 11-3-64, you interviewed Corso
regarding this letter.SA [deleted] was also present. Corso
acknowledged the communication as his and expressed surprise
that it had got out. He tried to explain it away asa joke,
engaged in by himself and three of Senator Thurmond's
assistants. According to Corso, this joke materialized one night
when the group was sitting around with nothing else to do. He
said there was no intention of releasing the letter, and that he
thought the original and all copies had been destroyed. You
asked him why, if it were a joke, the letter had been witnessed
by [deleted], an attorney who had formerly been on the
Subcommittee of the Senate investigating [deleted]. Corso
continued to insist it was written 'in fun.' You very strongly
impressed upon him that the FBI did not tap telephone wires on
Capitol Hill and that we certainly did not appreciate his brand
of so-called humor. (62-52026-76)"


My reply:

What can we make of this. I'm sure Corso was convinced that the
Senators' phones were being tapped and DeLoach could well have
been in charge. (remember Atlantic City) There's no way that we
can know for sure but in light of what we now know of the
charged political atmosphere in DC at the time, anything like
this could have happened. The letter could have been legitimate
and meant to be sent by Col. Corso but since it was reportedly
found on the street , there's just no way to figure it out. Too
much detail is missing. But one thing is for sure; these tiny
fragments of historical information should not be used to
ridicule folks or their motives.


Bryant continues:

In a highly redacted section titled OBSERVATIONS, the Jones memo
notes:"Corso and General Trudeau have caused the FBI and other
Federal agencies to expend many hours of work and much manpower
in running down wild accusations. For example, on 2-2-54, the
Bureau[deleted]."


My reply:

Corso and Trudeau worked together during the negotiations to end
the Korean War. Both were concerned about the American POWs.
Both used all means at their disposal to let those in power
understand what was happening. Many POW's never made it home.
Col. Corso and Gen. Trudeau ( he was the hero of Pork Chop Hill)
couldn't stand the idea of that and did everything in their
power to make the issues known. Wouldn't you, under the same
circumstances? These were not wild accusations and history shows
us that they were correct. We left many of our boys there to die
and did almost nothing about it. The same thing happened in Viet
Nam.


Bryant continues:

Jones concludes his memo with this observation: "It is felt that
Philip Corso has probably 'sold' himself to Congressman Feighan
as an intelligence expert. Based on his past history, if he is
placed on the staff of the Immigration and Nationality
Subcommittee [chaired by Feighan], we can expect another spate
of wild accusations -- this time about how communists are
engaged in thwarting the policies of immigration and
naturalization in the U.S. Too, it would seem that Corso is
'coaching' Feighan on how to combat criticism of the former's
history of biased personal attacks on all those he decides are
un-American."


My reply:

I'm sure Col. Corso did convince Congressman Feighan that he was
an experienced intelligence person. He was! But "sold" ? Why use
this term if not to denigrate Col. Corso. Yes he would have
worked to expose the communists he felt were lurking in our
government. But why was the FBI having this type of political
discussion. This should not have been their concern. Weren't
they there to protect us from the communists. This is all very
strange and it's not Col. Corso's doing.


Bryant continues:

Six days after receiving Jones' memo, DeLoach sent a classified
memo of his own to his supervisor (a Mr. Mohr). He opens the
missive with his review: "Mr. Jones' memorandum to me dated
2-11-65 reflected that [Feighan] had written to the Director
under date of 2-6-65 advising he [Feighan] had seen a memorandum
from Attorney General Katzenbach to Congressman Celler
concerning the background of one Philip J. Corso. Feighan took
exception to this memorandum, terming it a violation of Corso's
civil rights. Feighan stated he desired to meet with the
Director and discuss this matter. Referenced memorandum [the one
written by Jones] recommended that the Director not take time to
discuss this matter with Feighan but that I should meet with
Feighan and set him straight with respect to Corso.

"As a matter of background, as previously indicated in
referenced memorandum, Corso is a self-styled intelligence
expert who retired from the military approximately 3 years ago,
and he has been working as one of Senator Strom Thurmond's many
assistants. He has been somewhat of a thorn in our side because
of self-initiated rumors, idle gossip and downright lies he has
spread to more or less perpetuate his own reputation as an
intelligence expert. His activities so far as we are concerned
are: [deleted subparagraph]."

On page 2 of his 4-page memo, DeLoach reports: "In Congressman
Feighan's letter to the Director, Feighan claimed that I
(DeLoach) threatened Corso by telling him that if he did not
reveal his source she would be brought before the Warren
Commission. This is true. I did threaten Corso and would do it
again. I felt that the only way to make him tell the truth on
the record was to possibly get him on the witness stand. I not
only threatened him but also told him that he was a poor
representative of a background which supposedly possessed
intelligence experience. In this latter incident, the Director
had me see Senators Eastland, Dirksen and Hruska and give them
the correct facts so that the record could be set straight. As a
matter of fact, I had to see Senator Dirksen in the hospital
inasmuch as he was suffering from a bleeding ulcer at this time,
however, was greatly concerned about this matter."


My reply:

The FBI sent the Jones memorandum to Attorney General Katzenbach
who in turn showed it to Congressman Cellar, who then showed it
to Congressman Feighan who then wrote Hoover to complain. The
remainder is DeLoach's justification for his actions. This is a
political fight and should not be taking place in the FBI. What
are they doing maligning the character of a person without
regard to the truth of the matter? Yes, Col. Corso was a thorn
in their collective sides but he was telling it as he saw it.
He's a brave man who fought on many fronts. We should not be
disregarding the information he's supplied us.


Bryant continues:

The last part of the dossier deals with interactions ensuing
from a libel suit brought by Corso against syndicated columnist
Drew Pearson, as witness this quote from an F.B.I. memo of April
1, 1966: "Drew Pearson's column of 3/29/65 referred to
Congressman Feighan's fight to put Corso on the Government
payroll and a portion of the column is entitled 'FBI Blackballs
Aide,' and indicates that Feighan phoned the Attorney General
and tongue-lashed him for turning over an FBI memorandum
concerning Corso [i.e., the touchy "name check" memo dated Nov.
10, 1964] to Representative Celler and accused the Attorney
General of 'McCarthy-like tactics' in circulating 'unevaluated'
information." [LWB comment: Someone apparently had "leaked" to
Pearson a copy of the then-classified memo, which Pearson's
lawyer later sought to have entered as exculpatory evidence into
the defendant's discovery process.]


My reply:

So the FBI leaks a damaging SECRET memo of unevaluated
information to a syndicated columnist Drew Pearson. Don't you
see any problem with that and why it would or could become a
problem for Col. Corso.? Can't you see why he might be a bit
upset? The FBI at that time was compromised, any way you look at
it. No body did anything without Hoover's approval. I smell a
real rat; don't you? The memo called Col. Corso a "rat".
Wouldn't that distress you. Can't you see why Col. Corso sued?
Haven't you asked yourself why this was all the information from
tCprso's file you received. Don't you think there must have been
much more? Could it be that you're the one being manipulated.

Bryant continues:

Who knows how far Corso progressed with his lawsuit, but I
suppose that his status as a public figure would've been
factored into the equation at some point before trial. For
example, the private Corso and the public Corso merge smoothly
in his self-defense letter-to-editor printed in the Washington
Post for April 3, 1965. After denying that he ever had
implicated CIA personnel in promoting any Oswald-informant
rumors, he ends his letter by referring to his exemplary Army
career: "... I have received 17 decorations and over 50 written
citations, including four from Cabinet members during my tour of
duty with the National Security Council."


My reply:

Col. Corso was not a public figure but a very private
individual. He was not well known except to those in power. He
had many good friends and was well respected for his honesty,
good judgment, and bravery. He did receive 17 decorations and
over 50 citations. Would those have gone to a psychopath or
liar. Are psychopaths and liars given commands of nuclear
missile bases?


Bryant continues:

Is it premature, now, to judge Corso's overall character and
credibility on the strength of his (liberally censored) F.B.I.
dossier? Shouldn't we withhold final judgment until we can
compel (via FOIA litigation) the Army and the CIA to cough up
ALL their own records pertaining to his activities, alleged
experiences, and motivation? During his Napoleonic lifetime,
Phil Corso managed to tell many a tale. Now, as a dead man, he
can tell no more -- but his official records can go on telling
and telling and telling.....


My reply:

This is one of the sickest hatchet jobs on a good man's
character that I have ever read. There's nothing here of any
substance, but twisted and turned around, it makes Col. Corso
look like a raving lunatic. Of course that was it's intention.
Remember Paul Bennewitz. Once a person is made to look or seem
deranged, there's no need to deal with the information they
supply.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                          Re: More Occam - Skavhaug

From: Asgeir W. Skavhaug <asge-s@online.no>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 23:10:18 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:32:12 -0400
Subject: Re: More Occam - Skavhaug


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:07:42 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:32:19 -0400

 >Subject: More Occam

 >My post on Occam may have been a lot to digest, especially for
 >people who don't know physics. I'll try to simplify.
 >I quoted an FAQ on Occam's Razor from a physics website. Most of
 >it talked about the misuse of the principle.
 >The principle itself was formulated, supposedly, by a Franciscan
 >friar in the 14th century. It's been translated from Latin
 >(already there are problems knowing which formulation is
 >authentic), and then reinterpreted and reworded more times,
 >probably, than anyone can count.

<snip>

 >In other words, you can't just look at two theories, and pick
 >the one that requires the fewest assumptions. You need empirical
 >data, otherwise known as facts. The theories have to fit the
 >facts, before you can begin to apply Occam's Razor to them. In

<snip>

 >Suppose we knew for a fact that a meteor had
 >been visible from the pilots' cabin. In other words, we'd know
 >beyond any doubt that a meteor was seen that night, that it was
 >seen at the time the pilots said they saw the craft, and that it
 >was seen in the part of the sky the pilots would have beenfacing.
 >Then we could compare two theories to explain the pilots'
 >sighting. One theory says they  saw a meteor. That, clearly,
 >fits the facts -- there was a meteor at that time, and we know
 >that people often misinterpret what they see.

 >Another theory says they saw an alien craft. That might also fit
 >the facts -- because, after all, the pilots reported seeing
 >something that sounds like an aircraft of some unknown sort. And
 >there's no logical reason why they couldn't have seen an alien
 >craft at the same time a meteor was sighted. Maybe, in this
 >version of the story, they say they'd actually changed course at
 >the moment the meteor supposedly appeared, so they wouldn't have
 >been able to see it.According to Occam, however, we prefer the
 >meteor theory, because the alien theory forces us to make
 >an additional assumption -- that there are unknown craft flying
 >around. These craft might really exist, but this sighting doesn't
 >prove it, because the meteor explanation fits the facts.

 >This, however, is not how this sighting was. Nobody has
 >identified any unquestionable meteor that the pilots might have
 >seen. Thus, the meteor theory is pure speculation. There aren't
 >any facts for it to fit, other than that the pilots saw a bright
 >light shoot by, and that their description of it doesn't have to
 >be accurate, because witnesses are often wrong. The alien theory
 >is also speculation. There aren't any facts for it to fit, other
 >than that the pilots saw a bright light they said was a craft
 >with windows, and that their description could well be accurate,
 >because witnesses are often right.

 >There's no way to decide between these theories. Occam doesn't
 >apply. The theory of parsimony is misleading, because it takes
 >us away from facts and data. It makes life and science simpler
 >than they really are. It rules out the alien explanation, simply
 >because someone subjectively prefers the other one. But it
 >doesn't tell us that the alien explanation is less likely. We
 >may believe that for all sorts of reasons -- but they have
 >nothing to do with Occam's Razor.

 >Greg Sandow

Greg & List:

Just some thoughts: I guess (assume) nobody has ever been
watching and following meteors as they were falling to
the ground; one can only assume that the 'fireballs' in
the sky seen by a few (the return of the Mir space station
was seen by many, though...), will become meteors as they
hit the ground, split into meteor fragments. But, they could
also be real UFOs in flames, after entering the atmosphere
(e.g., Mir)..... However, we have never met the aliens, or
found any of their ships, or fragments of them; what's been
found are usually melted stones or iron cores (meteors).
(Most of these meteor fragments fall into the sea, and
will never be found.)

Further, Occam's name was/is also spelt 'Ockham'; Occam was
(has become) the simplest form, though... but not really the
correct one (!?), as the name of the village he came from,
was Ockham (as it was spelt in those days, and today, maybe).

Simpler models are, generally, 'more likely' to be correct
than complex ones, in other words, that 'nature' prefers
simplicity. ('As the crow flies' is the shortest route
between two places on the ground.)


Regards,

Asgeir









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 18:49:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:37:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:07:20 +0100

 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:39:55 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100

 >>>>The reasons why this should be the case are worthy of study in
 >>>themselves - and indeed there a few sociologists and folklorists
 >>>who have made attempts at studying motivations and belief
 >>>systems held by UFOlogists.

 >>It is difficult to walk the fine line between the two
 >>"traditions" (all sightings explainable vs some not explainable)
 >>without getting vociferous arguments from whichever side you are
 >>discussing. Hard nosed skeptics/scoffers/debunkers find it
 >>unbelieveably illogical to BELIEVE that there could be any
 >>sightings that couldn't be explained in conventional terms.
 >>Their ultimate resort is that "there will be unexplained
 >>sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
 >>not enough information to form a conclusion." To this the
 >>skeptics from the other side argue that there are sightings
 >>which have more than enough credible information for explanation
 >>or identification, but the information in the sighting report
 >>contradicts all conventional explanations.

 >>And, it would seem, never the twain shall meet!

 >>Without unexplained cases there would be no ufology as we know
 >>it now. (There might be "ufology" based on hte paranormal or
 >>visions reported by cultists and religionists, etc. I, for one,
 >>would not be interested in that sort of ufology.)

 >Hi Bruce,

 >Thanks for your thoughtful, erudite response. At least someone
 >has taken the trouble to read what I have been saying rather
 >than jumping to conclusions.

As noted below it is Dave who has jumped to conclusions.

 >At the end of the day, I'll have to lay my cards on the table
 >and go with your group who say "there will be unexplained
 >sightings simply because there are sightings for which there is
 >not enough information to form a conclusion."


I wonder what the basis for this strange claim is. It is a
testable hypothesis provable as incorrect. Here is the
definition of UNKOWN from the largest unclassified study ever
done for the USA Air Force, Project Blue Book Special Report
#14. Most of the work was done by professional people at
Battelle Memorial Institute.Copies are available.

"UNKNOWN - This designation in the identification code was
assigned to those reports of sightings wherein the description
of the object and its maneuvers could not be fitted to the
pattern of any known object or phenomenon"

"INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION - This identification category was
assigned to a report when, upon final consideration,there was
some essential item of information missing, or there was enough
doubt about what data were available to disallow identification
as a common object or some natural phenomenon. It is emphasized
that this category of identification was not used as a
convenient way to dispose of what might be called "poor
unknowns"., but as a category for reports that, perhaps, could
have been one of several known objects or natural phenomenon. No
reports identified as INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION contain
authenticated facts or impressions concerning the sighhting that
would prevent its being identified as a known object or
phenomenon. "

Let me add that it took agreement on the part of all 4 final
evaluators before a sighting could be listed as an UNKOWN,
whereas any 2 could label it as a known. Furthermore, the better
the quality of the sighting report, the more likely to be listed
as an UNKNOWN and the less likely to be listed as Insuf. Inf...
exactly what would be expected if the UNKNOWNS were truly
something different. In addition, on the basis of 6 different
observable characteristics, it was found that the probability
that the UNKNOWNS were just missed KNOWNS was less than 1%.

There is, therefore,not only no support from this professional
level study, done of 3201 cases, for the Clarke hypothesis, but
the data contradict it..

 >But to me that is the definition of a doubter/skeptic, not a
 >debunker (as I keep pointing out, 'debunk' is to expose false
 >claims, where these arise - Jerry Clark is a debunker of the
 >1897 Kansas Calfnapping, for example) - in my view only
 >individual claims can be "debunked" where there is sufficient
 >evidence to warrant such action.

A number of people on this List have indeed exposed the false
claims by the debunkers. They have debunked the debunkers.

 >Taking the stance that "there will always be unexplained
 >sightings" is a honest and open-minded standpoint. It's the same
 >viewpoint that the British MoD seem to have arived at after
 >years of study - judging by what the retired RAF Intelligence
 >personnel I've been interviewing have told me.

The stance may be honest and openminded, but is not supported by
the facts. It is contradicted by them. Therefore it is false.

 >I'd never rule out the possibility that some of these
 >unexplained cases could be/were extraterrestrial visitations;
 >but to me, there is no evidence. Until there is, I'll stick with
 >the "case not proven."

Let me see now: 2000+ physical Trace cases from 70+ countries,
loads of multiple witness reports, many radar visual cases, well
over 3000 pilot sightings hundreds of which involve effects on
the aircraft systems, .. all encompassing unusual flying objects
some of which land and take off in the middle of nowhere,
providing flight characteristics we Earthlings can't duplicate ,
but "there is no evidence". Surely you are jesting.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 22:19:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:39:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 21:52:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:02:56 -0300
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 ><snip>

 >>I've seen several examples lately of the simplest explanations
 >>for UFO sightings. Meteors that descend then climb from low
 >>altitudes-an unproven theory.

 >Don:

 >That theory may have been yours. As I recall about the
 >Chiles-Whitehead incident, the pilots reported the thing was
 >coming _toward_ them, not decending, then they reported that it
 >rose and disappeared as they dove the airplane. I recall someone
 >else pointing out that they reported the object disappeared, and
 >that a meteor travelling in a relatively flat trajectory and
 >then burning out or disappearing behind clouds could seem to be
 >rising and disappearing to a pilot diving a plane and looking
 >out the window.

 >>Ball lightening-another unproven phenomenon.

 >No, the problem is finding the right explanation, not proving
 >the existance of the phenomenon.

 ><snip>

 >>Swamp gas. [This one we know exists but how come we never see
 >>reports by people claiming they've seen swamp gas?]

 >I see this one appearing all the time on this and other Lists.
 >Do you have a list of all of the people who have ever tried to
 >use this one on a UFO incident? Any skeptics there?


Hi Bob,

Yes Hynek proposed swamp gas as an explanation for a UFO
sighting by co-ed students from Hillsdale College, Michigan in
March of 1966-to his later regret. This likely triggered
un-substantiated ex parte explanations later on. It was  a
generalization used for UFO explanations back in the 60s or
70s-possibly later to molify the inquisitive press.

As for your earlier observations about the possibility of the
pilots -while diving the aircraft-mistook their maneuver as
resulting in a mistaken perception that the object climbed.
First of all I see nowhere in the repor where they did
that-likely because of the discomfort and danger that would have
been imparted to the passengers. The suggestion that by diving
the pilots would have fooled themselves in to believing that the
object climbed instead is a laymans interpretation of how it
would really have been perceived.

I've mentioned before about how pilots senses become enured to
these false imputs while they have visual references outside the
cockpit [this is not thse case in totally IFR situations ie no
reference to the horizon or a cloud layer, Sun stars, moon]and
if you have ever experienced negative G you would understand how
unsubtle that is. To some degree this [plus and minus G] might
have applied in the Coyne incident which Keven Randle has
already given expert explanations for.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 23:59:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:41:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:39:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000

I posed this question to you:

 >>To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >>someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >>original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >>unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >>show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >>necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >>more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

You responded,

 >No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
 >craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
 >this semantical game.

It is not my job to prove your claim by process of ellimination.
All that I must do is to assert that these objects are, at
present, unidentified.

It is your burden, as the claimant, to prove your claim.  You
must show that in any of these cases, it was 1) a space ship,
and 2) that it was alien.  If you cannot do this, the hypothesis
remains unproven.

You had previously written,

 >>>My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >>>evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in this
 >>>article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >>>various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or identical
 >>>to the cases illustrated in this article, are what make the ETH
 >>>the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the present debate,
 >>>I am willing to base my argument on these 18 cases.

If you insist that there is cumulative evidence, then help me
out, here. What are the recurring patterns, those listed in the
original article?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 6

                   Eras News: 05-07-01 Cattle Mute Lecture

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 23:19:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:43:54 -0400
Subject: Eras News: 05-07-01 Cattle Mute Lecture


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

May 7, 2001

____________________________


[Forwarded from UFOBC, for those of you in or near the Vancouver
  area]



UFO*BC Proudly Presents a Lecture/Slide Presentation by:

Fernand Belzil

on

Cattle Mutilations

Fern Belzil has been raising cattle on the family ranch in Saint
Paul, Alberta since the early fifties. He knows the difference
between a natural death and a mutilation. For the last 6 years
he has been investigating UADs (Unexplained Animal Deaths) in
Alberta and the neighbouring provinces. They occur much more
often than people realize - he has been to 54 mutilation
investigations so far. There are also details not often
reported, such as strange craft and humanoids seen. Join Fern
and UFOBC for a very informative evening.


LECTURE:
    7:00 PM, Friday, May 11, 2001
    Pacific Space Centre Auditorium
    (formerly H.R. MacMillan Planetarium)
    1100 Chestnut Street, Vancouver, B.C.
          ****FREE PARKING****

TICKETS:
    $15 - Available at the door only

For Reservations or Further Information:
    UFO*BC Hotline: (604) 878-6511
    UFO*BC e-mail: contactus@ufobc.ca
    Coming Events: http://www.ufobc.ca/Events/index.html


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project, a
non-profit future studies project, providing the latest news and
reports relating to the leading-edge issues of our time and
their possible present and future implications as we enter the
21st Century and a new Era, as well as periodic information and
updates on TEP- related news, projects and events


THE ERAS PROJECT

Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/erasproject









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 00:20:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:15:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser


 >Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:03:57 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

<snip>

 >Hello Steve:

 >Question: Have you or anyone else seen the price of upgrading
 >participation in this event, from the basic dumb-rube rate up to
 >the VIP Luncheon in-crowd ticket?

 >Clearly, somebody has to pay for all those luncheon snacks, not
 >to mention a chance to meet Dr. Greer in person.

 >Hopefully there will be lots of cameras rolling so that we can
 >learn who became part of the elite, how well dressed they were
 >etc., and who fell by the wayside.


Hi Larry-

Yeah. There's a lot of money involved in this, with the initial
briefing to be webcast "live" there has to be enough to cover
the connection cost and the equipment (since that isn't a
standard package offered by the National Press Club).

I requested an invitation for myself and the Chairman of the
Fund for UFO Research, but we were told that the briefing on
Wednesday was only for current members of the working press, and
that request was denied. I was advised that if I could get a
Member of Congress to attend the VIP Luncheon (I just happen to
work at the U.S. House), I could tag along. No cost was
mentioned, and I've seen nothing to indicate that tickets are
being sold to anyone. I would add that it is unlikely that the
press will be encouraged to give much publicity to the VIP
event, as there may be some desire to let attendees remain
anonymous. In the political environment of DC that would be
normal procedure, and the press would do its part to try and
find out what happened and who was there.

The all day public event on Saturday is reportedly free, but
seating is limited to about 300.

I would also be interested in knowing of any admission charges
to any of these events.

=================

A number of comments have been made on various lists regarding
the "Briefing", and we will all know within a few days if
there's any great revelation to come out of this.

I believe that Dr. Greer honestly hopes to trigger a National
movement that will result in "full disclosure". This event is
the culmination of several years of effort on his part, and
reportedly includes the production of a four hour video tape of
testimony from former military and government witnesses. This
tape will be given to the press on Wednesday, and I suspect that
it will be sold to the public after that. But, while the sales
of tapes and other materials may help, the cost of this event is
far greater.

 From what I can see on the local front, this is a non-event as
far as the public is concerned. There has been no publicity
about it, except for the mentions we've seen on the Internet. If
there's any hope of getting the public to the event on Saturday,
then it will have to come from the massive publicity expected to
result from the "disclosures" on Wednesday. Unfortunately, the
press in DC isn't very sympathetic to the subject of UFOs, and
getting good publicity is going to be tough.

It's going to be an interesting week.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                        Re: Serious Research - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:49:49 +1200
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:22:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sawers


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:26:41 -

 >"Over the years, I have decried the misuse of the term 'skeptic'
 >when used to refer to all critics of anomaly claims. Alas, the
 >label has been thus misapplied by both proponents and critics of
 >the paranormal. Sometimes users of the term have distinguished
 >between so-called 'soft' versus 'hard' skeptics, and I in part
 >revived the term 'zetetic' because of the term's misuse. But I
 >now think the problems created go beyond mere terminology and
 >matters need to be set right. Since 'skepticism' properly refers
 >to doubt rather than denial - nonbelief rather than belief -
 >critics who take the negative rather than an agnostic position
 >but still call themselves 'skeptics' are actually
 >pseudo-skeptics and have, I believed, gained a false advantage
 >by usurping that label....

 >"Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call
 >themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden
 >of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be
 >appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic. A result of
 >this is that many critics seem to feel it is only necessary to
 >present a case for their counter-claims based upon plausibility
 >rather than empirical evidence."

 >Greg Sandow


Thanks Greg

This could be the time to define "skeptic" again?

 From the same website:

www.ufoskeptic.org/

"Skeptic - One who practices the method of suspended judgment,
engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified
by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider
alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior
beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes
its validity"

and  continuing on from Greg's post, Haisch says.....

".....I see myself a bit like the kid standing next to the kid
looking through the hole in the big tall fence at the baseball
game. This means that the closest I am getting to inside
information will be a recounting of what is going on in there.

I myself am definitely not an insider, but certain contacts I
have acquired and/or befriended over a long period of time seem
to be on the periphery of some kind of inside which appears to
contain at least remarkable information, and apparently more
than that.

Let me be (somewhat) more specific.

I now have three completely independent examples of individuals
whom I trust reporting to me that individuals they trust have
admitted to handling alien artifacts in 'our' possession in the
course of secret official duties. (The special access level in
the one case for which I know it is R, a not widely known SCI
level whose existence was finally verified for me by someone who
himself had a very high access level, though short of that one,
as being "reserved for someone at the very top." I do not know,
however, whether it is specifically reserved or designated for
this topic.)

It is interesting that from the clandestine intelligence world
perspective the scientific community, for all of its technical
and theoretical sophistication, is viewed as remarkably naive in
certain respects. We scientists tend to think that we know
better than anyone else what is possible and what is impossible,
and that we of all people could surely not be kept in the dark
for very long.

Over the course of time I have learned how it would indeed be
possible to maintain decades-long secrecy on this topic and why
this might be justified, concepts I myself once dismissed (see
Black Special Access Programs, also Some Thoughts on Keeping It
Secret).

My impression is that the justification may be waning at last.

(For some insight on the origin of this situation see the book
UFOs and the National Security State: An Unclassified History.
Vol. 1: 1947-1973 by Richard Dolan.) "


The above Richard Dolan also has a lot of interesting things to
say about "Black Ops" and "Secrecy"


Regards

William












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                       Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 07:05:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:37:48 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain



 >Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 15:14:05 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: UFO CE-II in Granada, Spain

 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca,
 >>Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:14:09 -0400
 >>Subject: Spain: UFO CE-II in Granada


Hi Larry--

I received a correction from Sr. Salinas ysterday. They're
having trouble with their site. The alternate addy is:

http://sib.nodos.com

or

www.sib.nodos.com

 >1) If I read correctly, there is only one single witness.>

Yes, that's right. One witness.

 >2) The slow motion suggests a possible balloon. Seen against
 >the blinding Sun, it might not have been possible for Maldonado
 >to get a good enough look to tell the difference.>>

Unlikely given the ground evidence and the fact that the object
seemed capable of independent motion (advancing then retreating
and finally advancing once more before taking flight)--BUT,
anything is possible on God's green earth.


Hope this helps,

Scott










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                                Ravenna 1966

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:53:13 -0400
Subject: Ravenna 1966


Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began
when Portage County Deputy Sheriffs Spaur and Neff were out of
their cruiser investigating an abandoned automobile in early
morning. A large glowing structured (disc-like) object rose up
out of the woods, moved toward them and stopped overhead,
brightly illuminating them and the local environment. It was
making a humming sound.

On instructions from their dispatcher, they began following it
as it moved away at about 300-500 feet altitude, continuing to
illuminate the ground via an inverted cone of light (narrower at
the bottom) from its underside. As the object moved, it wobbled
slightly so that the cone of light rocked back and forth. A
high-speed chase ensued, with the object alternately speeding
away into the distance, and then stopping until they caught up
with it again.

In East Palestine, Ohio, police from a separate jurisdiction
were monitoring their communications and saw (looking westerly)
the UFO arrive at their location at relatively low level with
the Portage County cruiser in hot pursuit. They wheeled around
and joined in the chase, which ended in Conway, Pennsylvania.

Local police called their dispatcher and Air Force interceptors
were scrambled to investigate. The UFO could be seen in the
distance hovering and now appearing as a bright point of light.
As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
"straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

Bob says Venus. Jury?


Dick Hall








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                        The Smouldering Dud 'Debris'

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 06:33:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:00:57 -0400
Subject: The Smouldering Dud 'Debris'


Hello All,

Here we go again, as reported by UFO Watchdog, Royce Meyers III,
nothing happened with the so-called "Roswell Debris". The
ufoxfiles.com site was supposedly "hacked". I am really, really
tired of these snake oil salesmen in this area of study. I'll
bet blame for the hacking will be laid at the feet of the
'government'.

The excuse for the flim flam job, done, I will bet we never hear
form this particular artifact again. The good people, who were
left holding the bag (and a charge on their credit cards,) are
now wondering what happened. Just because the UFO X-files site
looked good, doesn't mean it was legit.

Here we have another example of the buffoonery and the overt
fleecing of people for something as high profile as a piece of a
otherworldly craft.

Exit the Klowns from center ring in their little car,
saucer-shaped of course, and the next act is: Who knows? Is it
irrefutable evidence as a glowing lens flare? Testimony by
someone whom we haven't heard of, off-ing a rubber alien? Or
a press conference, revealing nothing in particular.

In the meantime the legitimate folks, like Dick Hall, Stan
Friedman, Bruce Maccabee, Jenny Randles, and others, too numerous
to mention, including sceptical thinkers, are out there while
the media focuses on the Klowns.

Having been a student of things in the sky most of my life, I
have seen some things I can't explain. Maybe it is time to
institutionalise, a set of rules, a board or panel that oversees
the evidence brought forward.

As long as the positions on that board could be controlled.
However, I think the Klowns would takeover as they always do,
because they are the Idiots the media find "Newsworthy"


Not holding my breath,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:42:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:05:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:33:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:51:44 -0000

<snip>

 >Regarding your case #13, The Cash Landrum Case, let's address
 >the illogic of the incident as evidence for an Extraterrestrial
 >craft:

 >1) Why would one of the slowest items in our military aircraft
 >inventory be used to chase a UFO?

 >2) Where did the 23 helicopters come from? Where were they
 >based? Who flew them?

 >3) Where were they going? Betty Cash said they were headed
 >toward the Houston International airport, less than 15 miles
 >away. Why did no one at the airport report seeing such a huge
 >formation of aircraft following the brilliant UFO? 23
 >helicopters make a lot of racket at 9 P.M.

 >4) Why would a report from two witnesses, a policeman and his
 >wife, that they saw some helicopters 4-5 hours later be
 >considered a confirmation of this UFO report, when they _did
 >not_ report seeing any UFO? Is this logical?

 >Cash-Landrum fails because no one has been able to account for
 >the 23 helicopters, let alone account for the UFO.

 >Where is the logic in this illogical example of ufology?


Hi Bob,

You are probably the first one to suggest that the Cash/ Landrum
case is illogical and fails. Why, because of the helicopters?
The lack of note by Houston International? There agin you
presume to know about ATC, radar and control zones when actually
you seem to have little understanding about how ATCZ's work?

I'll leave that there and let you try to figure out what I'm
referring to. When you give up-let me know and I'll explain it
to you.

Trying to deflect away from the sighting by using tired
explanations like Venus and Saturn solves nothing.

I think the physical evidence - the health of the witnesses, and
the burned patch on the highway should be worthy of
consideration.

I know there is some anxiousness among debunkers over cases like
this [I can't wait to see how you begin to handle the 10s of
thousands of pilots reports and Haines's NARCAP].

BTW - how about laying some cards on the table Bob. Just what is
your connection to the scientific field? It would be helpful to
know this so I don't assume or not assume your expertise in
certain areas. Are you an amateur astronomer?


Best,

Don









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                              Re: Greer On Bell

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 08:46:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:12:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

The following is now making the rounds of UFO related email
lists. We're now being encouraged to donate money to the
cause.....Note the number of email lists this was sent to.

<begin quote>

To: "[B]  CT" <Conspiracy-Theory@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO51" <ufo51_2000@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO2U" <UFO2U@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  SKY WATCH" <skywatch_discussion@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  DISCUSS UFO" <discuss-ufo@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  REAL UFOS" <RealUFOs@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  SKY OPEN" <Skyopen@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO DISCLOSURE" <UFO-Disclosure@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO HOTLINE" <UFO_HOTLINE_BULLETI@egroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO STUDIES" <ufostudies@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFOINFO" <ufoinfo@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFONET" <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>,
   "[B]  UFO-TALK" <ufotalk@yahoogroups.com>


[Interesting that P-47, C.E., & UpDates were not included --ebk]


From: "World-Action" <michaeli@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 22:56:12 +0100
Subject: [discuss-ufo] Re: DISCLOSURE - Steven Greer on Art Bell Show


Forward from Debbie of CSETI & Disclosure Project:



Thanks Michael.

Please tell people that there is a link on the Web
site with information on how to donate money.

www.disclosureproject.org/donations.htm

It allows for using PayPal, which is secure and works
internationally - credit cards or from bank accounts.
They don't need to email me :)

Thanks again,
Debbie

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

Nobody seems to be saying much about Steven Greer's talk on the
Art Bell Show on May 4th.

I felt it was about the most amazing thing I've ever heard -
considering the significance of what Dr Greer is saying and what
is going to happen over the coming weeks.

Absolutely amazing.


There is a chance now that life will become normal for me,
instead of being the 'odd' one all the time. Wondering and
straining to figure out what I should say to people.  I have had
to be careful about who I tell about the most wonderful
experiences of my life - when I have been within forty feet,
several times, of three 8 metre discs. Plus other experiences.

Perhaps, more importantly, people are going to see that life
doesn't have to be the way it is. Then people may start to trust
their own feelings and emotions which tell them, constantly,
that life today is pretty crap.

And hopefully soon depression will no longer be classed as an
illness. And instead the people who make drugs for depressives,
and, and the doctors who classify depressives as 'ill' will be
able to get the treatment they need. A big kick up a certain
region of the anatomy.

And... when... we have over unity power generators in our house
and vehicle and never have another power or fuel bill... and can
travel around not polluting the world... running on free energy,
we will start to get the mad idea that the whole of life should
be enjoyed.

If anyone is desperate, like I am, for the truth to come out as
soon as possible, why not put some action where your heart is
and send CSETI/Disclosure Project some money? They have incurred
huge cost to get to the stage where they now are. There's more
work to do and it is vitally important for the whole of humanity
that both the truth comes out and the technology for over unity
power generation we so desperately need - while there is still
time..

If you can afford $/�5,000 then send that.
If you can afford $/�500 then send that.
If you can't afford anything - send $/�5.

For an address to send your
money to, contact Debbie:
webmaster@disclosureproject.org


Thanks Steven, and colleagues.

   Michael


The World Gathering For Truth
   17/18/19 August 2001
http://www.world-action.co.uk


Ref:  The Disclosure Project:
http://www.disclosureproject.org

<end quote>

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                       Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:02:09 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:15:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:00 -0300

<snip>

 >>And I still consider Menzel as unscientific, irrational,
 >>arrogant, overbearing and viciously anti, when it comes to UFOs
 >>as documented by Jim McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, Brad Sparks and
 >>others. But he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences
 >>and one of the top dogs in the astronomical community.

 >>As I noted in my IUR piece and in FROMJ-12 and in my Menzel
 >>Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC, I think he was playing a role for
 >>the MJ-12 group.


 >Pardon my present state of deshabille - I'm in the midst of
 >moving a ton of paper from one place to another - but what's
 >friendship got to do with it, anyway? If anything, it's a
 >detriment, not a bonus, as it tends to cloud judgment. It might
 >even hinder same.

 >You, Stan, and Budd Hopkins, could be the best friends on the
 >planet Earth, for example, and that wouldn't necessarily move us
 >one step closer to anything.

 >More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >- that should be your job.)

 >Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >with yours?

 >Let's get even more interesting: Who, in your estimation, makes
 >up today's MJ-12? Who replaced Menzel? Who heads it up now? Who
 >are the other 11 members? And what proof do you have of same?

 >None. Nothing whatsoever.

 >And it's high time that Jerry Clark called you, Budd Hopkins,
 >and David Jacobs to account - as something other than friends.
 >But that ain't gonna happen, not in this lifetime, anyway.

 >Friends is as friends does, I guess. Meanwhile, accounts of
 >MJ-12 and alien abductions continue unabated.

 >While the US goverment covers it all up?

 >And you people refuse to understand how ridiculous such
 >assumptions are on their surface?

 >Disgusted Dennis Stacy

Dear "Disgusted":

That's the problem; you only look at the surface. Try looking
underneath it.

MJ-12 and abductions are two quite different subjects (or
issues). Abductions are not an "assumption." Something
definitely is happening to these people. Whether or not they are
being diddled with by aliens is unproven, but the prima facie
evidence is very disturbing.

What is needed is thorough study of the abductees and their
stories, not declarations (without study) about how "ridiculous"
it is to "assume" something is really going on. That amounts to
(a) denial of data, and (b) insulting honest people who (for the
most part) are deeply disturbed by what is happening to them.


Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 09:09:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:17:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:44:05 EDT
 >Subject: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:40:32 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100

Bob,

 >Back during the review on these pages of the Trent photo
 >contest, you admitted to not knowing Paul Trent, but said that
 >he was either "diabolical" or "stupid, lazy and unimaginative"
 >and so couldn't possibly have been bright enough to fake them.

My word. I was simply passing on an almost universal judgment by
those who did know Paul Trent, either through interviews or
through long personal acquaintance. I would never for a moment
have characterized Trent as "stupid, lazy and unimaginative"
without a body of testimony to that effect from persons in a
position to know.

 >Were you just yukking it up?

No. Are you?

Cheers,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:13:10 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:19:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:33:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:51:44 -0000

 >Dick:

 >Regarding your case #13, The Cash Landrum Case, let's address
 >the illogic of the incident as evidence for an Extraterrestrial
 >craft:

 >1) Why would one of the slowest items in our military aircraft
 >inventory be used to chase a UFO?

Jet interceptors have often been used to chase UFOs. In this
case the object was hovering low over a road and acting as if it
were having troubles (speculation). You'll have to ask the
military what its protocols are for chasing UFOs.

 >2) Where did the 23 helicopters come from? Where were they
 >based? Who flew them?

Very good question, and an integral part of the mystery. The
Army Inspector General could not find out where they came from.
John Schuessler later developed a reasonable hypothesis that
they were from a Navy/military task force in the Gulf of Mexico,
which could be the reason why none of the area Army or Air Force
bases could account for them.

 >3) Where were they going? Betty Cash said they were headed
 >toward the Houston International airport, less than 15 miles
 >away. Why did no one at the airport report seeing such a huge
 >formation of aircraft following the brilliant UFO? 23
 >helicopters make a lot of racket at 9 P.M.

There were dozens of police and other ground witnesses to the
helicopters. You need to read John Schuessler's definitive
reports and/or his book.

 >4) Why would a report from two witnesses, a policeman and his
 >wife, that they saw some helicopters 4-5 hours later be
 >considered a confirmation of this UFO report, when they _did
 >not_ report seeing any UFO? Is this logical?

I don't know what you are referring to here. AS I said, there
were lots of contemporary witnesses to the helicopters.

 >Cash-Landrum fails because no one has been able to account for
 >the 23 helicopters, let alone account for the UFO.

 >Where is the logic in this illogical example of ufology?

Where is your logic? Since the UFO and the helicopters can't be
explained, the case is explained? Are you, in fact, suggesting
that no such things were seen (denying the data)? If not, then
what is your explanation (or hypothesis) for the UFO?


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 09:32:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:21:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 11:51:30 +0100

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500


Dr. Dave,

 >OK you've got a sense of humour, you've convinced me.

 >Unfortunately, I don't listen to Canadian radio (?), so I have
 >to rely on what I see you churning out here day after day.

Wow. Since I don't take very seriously most of what goes on
here, much of what I write is with tongue at least partly in
cheek. Maybe you Brits just don't get our subtle Yank humor.

 >Surely only someone with a wicked of humour could proclaim its
 >existence in public, then pick someone up on the use of grammar
 >in the same paragraph.

I don't recall complaining about your grammar. I believe I was
taking issue with a single item of punctuation. Do pelicanists
have thinner skin than other humans?

 >In fact, I would like to be proved wrong, who would not want to
 >see proof that we are not alone?

Well, just about any thoughtful person, I should think. Anybody
who _wants_ to believe that ETs are here is, at the very least,
a seriously thoughtless individual.

 >But it's down to what constitutes evidence - some people have
 >different thresholds, and I guess mine are set pretty high (but
 >not as high as our dear friend Dr Menzel).

Mine are high, too, and that's yet another reason I'm not a
pelicanist.

 >Now Jerry, how many of your friends would be as willing to
 >accept the proposition that they _may_equally_ be wrong?

All of them. That's why we're the true skeptics here.

 >With so many versions of 'believer' ufology to choose from,
 >they can't all be right.

Define "believer" ufology, and we can discuss this further. It
sounds like nothing I or any friend I respect would want any
part of.

 >Take your 'UFO Encyclopedia' for instance - of all the hundreds
 >of cases and reports detailed, _some_ of these must be hoaxes
 >and misidentifications.

For a guy who actually wrote and published a generous review of
that book, you seem strangely obtuse (or, more to the point,
disingenuous). May I suggest a second reading, wherein you will
find any number of hoaxes and misidentifications discussed,
sometimes in considerable detail?

 >Surely it is in your own interests that ET does not land on the
 >White House lawn, because if this should happen perhaps 99
 >percent of the material in your book would be revealed as
 >nothing but wishful thinking.

If this strange sentence has any meaning to anyone who
doesn't speak pelicanese, please let me know.

 >Ponder on that one for a while.

Actually, you should have pondered on that sentence awhile
before typing it in the mistaken presumption that it would make
sense to any reader other than yourself. Its meaning, in fact,
continues to elude me after repeated readings. Perhaps you are
hinting that you have psychic insights into what we would learn
from an ET landing on the White House lawn. Or if not, perhaps
you could help us all by providing a pelicanese/English
dictionary for those of us who don't speak the former. I'm sure
the sentence in question was intended to mean _something_.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                  Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:32:43 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:23:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Ledger


 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...

 >UpDaters may be amused by the following item, unearthed when I
 >was browsing through the slowly fossilising layers of
 >prehistoric magazines at Magonia Towers:

 > From Flying Saucer Review, volume one, number four,
 >September-October 1955.

 >"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
 >of UFO reports.

 >"In Los Angeles there were dozens of reports of three silvery
 >disc-shaped objects that 'changed formation as if playing tag
 >in the sky', and appeared to be 'leaping over each other'. A
 >squadron of jets went up to search for the objects, but returned
 >unsuccessful.

 >"It was suggested at first that they were weather baloons, but
 >the Weather Bureau reported that no balloons were aloft. Then
 >came the final explanation - the objects were inland pelicans!"

 >Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
 >wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.

Yes, probably. I see you are finally getting the hang of it,
John.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:26:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:37:02 -0000

 >>>>My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >>>>evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in
 >>>this article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >>>>various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or
 >>>>identical to the cases illustrated in this article, are what
 >>>>make the ETH the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the
 >>>>present debate,I am willing to base my argument on these 18
 >>>>cases.

 >>Exactly what is the difference between "discussing [my]
 >>hypothesis" and trying to explain the 18 cases? How can you do
 >>one without the other?

 >If your hypothesis is based upon a falacy, such as an assumption
 >that the only things that can appear to exhibit the
 >characteristics you listed in your article are ET craft, then
 >showing that these things might be characteristics of mundane
 >objects could show that your hypothesis could be false.

Which requires discussing specific cases and offering a
counter-hypothesis to explain them.

 >>You "began the examination of [my] 18 cases" by making a classic
 >>appeal to authority. Suppose I were to make a counter-appeal to
 >>scientists who do think my cited cases support the ETH. And, by
 >>the way, they would be scientists who have _actually_ studied
 >>UFO cases.

 >An appeal to authority would be if I would say, "Menzel said
 >this, so it _must be true_". If I cited some report or paper of
 >the good doctor's, this isn't citing authority, it's citing his
 >research.

What research? The panel of scientists didn't do any research.
They just made an "authoritative" (almost hackneyed)
pronouncement based on a limited presentation of data that they
saw no evidence in support of ETH. Naturally; the prsenters
didn't have a "saucer" to hand to them.

 >If we cannot use any studies or work done by others, what could
 >there be to debate? You gonna tell me that you personally went
 >out to Kuwait in '78, before the war, and determined that no
 >Iraqi reconnaisance aircraft could possibly have been
 >responsible for that one?

You can site other people's studies or work all you like, but in
this instance you pretty well did use the statement by the
panelists that they found no evidence of ET in a particular case
(or cases) as an authority for concluding ETH is not valid.
Again, I can cite other scientists who have actually studied
UFOs who would strongly disagree with the panel's
pronouncements. Neither would prove a thing.

Incidentally, I had direct communications from a scientist of
the Kuwait scientific organization (ca't recall its name right
now). Iraqui aircraft landing in a Kuwait oil field?

 >>The point is that you are citing these scientists as credible
 >>authorities (rather than doing your own evaluations), and making
 >>a number of dubious assumptions to boot.

 >What are these dubious assumptions about the validity of the
 >Sturrock Panel's work or the validity of the data they
 >considered? We could discuss these dubious assumptions, one at a
 >time, to see if they stand up to scrutiny.

 >>I don't know that the scientists were "handpicked by Peter
 >>Sturrock" and they certainly didn't include any UFO believers.

 >Well, we seem to have something we can mutually agree on: I
 >don't think there were any UFO skeptics there and you don't
 >think there were any believers. Maybe the panel was neutral
 >after all. As to their credibility, as you put it, a couple were
 >astronomers, one was director of the meteoritics institute at
 >the University of New Mexico, pretty credible to me.

Credible scientific credentials, but have they independently
studied UFO reports? I don't know one way or the other how
"pro," "anti," or "neutral" they were. Maybe some of the
participants can chime in on that.

 >Oh, I forgot, Dick. You don't think that astronomers know didly
 >about meteors. Only self-appointed ufologists, I guess, are
 >credible in determining whether something was a meteor or an
 >alien spaceship.

Ha! Ha!

 >>Nor do I have any reason to beleive that they have _actually_
 >>studied _any_ UFO cases on their own. A very short "briefing",
 >>disturbingly similar to the Robertson Panel in 1953, in which
 >>"science" was subservient to public relations.

 >Who's public relations effort do you think this was, and what
 >might have been its purpose?

If you have actually read the Robertson Panel report, you will
be aware that they were concerned with the popular image of UFOs
and trying to debunk it, rather than trying to do any real
science, because they feared UFO reports would clog intelligence
panels. That is a political-military PR type of activity, not
science.

 >>>>Also, you ought to take a look at Bernard Haisch's web
 >>>>site that someone posted on this list a while back:
 >>>>www.ufoskeptic.org Haisch is a professional astronomer of
 >>>>considerable experience who established this site out of concern
 >>>>that scientists are too readily and glibly discarding UFO
 >>>>reports without proper study.

 >This is not deferring to "authority"?

It's not an appeal to authority, since I was not claiming the
site as proof of anything; merely recommending it as an antidote
to certain ungrounded skeptical attitudes.

 >>your interpretation here is mightily convenient, while of course
 >>ignoring everything else on the Haisch web site (which all
 >>observant parties should look at for themselves).

 >Huh? Richard, you are getting good at changing the subject. You
 >must be taking lessons from The Master (who's name must not be
 >spoken - He knows who He is.) What is the point of "everything
 >else on the Haisch web site", when I was discussing the
 >information about one of the cases on your list.

I'm not changing the subject at all. Merely pointing out your
highly selective citation from it as if that proved your point.
Again, people can (and should) look at the site and make up
their own minds.

 >When I attempt to discuss the merits of one of your 18 TRUFOS,
 >you refer me to everything else on this website, except the
 >part of the site which refers to _your_ incident.

The site doesn't contribute anything new or important about "my"
incident, as you like to call it. You tried to make out that it
somehow supports your position, which it certainly does not.
Quite the contrary.

 >>>So, to restate my question in my previous post, has any new
 >>>evidence for the Coyne and Cash-Landrum cases surfaced since
 >>>this 1997 Sturrock Panel study, which concluded (see above) that
 >>>these two cases, as well as the others presented, did not
 >>>represent evidence for the ETH?

 >>You have not offered any convincing explanation of these two
 >>cases.

 >I have proposed a meteor as an explanation for the Coyne
 >helicopter incident, citing Klass's investigation and early media
 >interviews with the crew.

 >>If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
 >>meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
 >>states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
 >>virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
 >>area.

 >As a matter of fact, only a tiny proportion of fireball meteors
 >are _reported_ at all. They can be visible over a wide area, if
 >the sky is clear or dark and they are sufficiently bright and,
 >but whether anyone happens to be looking at that hour is another
 >matter.

One of this brightness and duration on a clear night would have
been widely seen and reported.

 >Of course, if a "UFO" which looks like a meteor is a meteor,
 >then reports of the "UFO" would qualify as meteor reports,
 >wouldn't they, whether they were received by those collecting
 >meteor reports or not?

Good God! It didn't look like a meteor, it didn't act like a
meteor, it was not reported elsewhere as surely a fireball of
this magnitude and duration would have been. Ground witnesses
saw it hovering near the helicopter and beaming a green light
down on the helicopter. It had visible structure and precisely
positioned body lights. When it departed, it showed a white
"taillight" and made a 45 degree turn to the right.

 >This is something of a chicken or egg argument, but at least I
 >can take you to museums where there are hundreds of beautiful
 >specimens of UFO/meteors. How many ET spaceship/meteors can you
 >show me, I'm up for a field trip about now.

Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
CUFOS-NICAP files.

 >>Moving right along--

 >>#12, the April 17, 1966 police chase from Ravenna, Ohio to
 >>Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

 >>The witness, officer Dale Spaur, described the brilliant UFO as
 >>disappearing in the morning sky as the Sun rose after the long
 >>chase. Many commentators have viewed this last object as very
 >>likely the Planet Venus. One view is that the genuine UFO was
 >>present during the early part of the incident, but that Venus
 >>was seen, and chased, later.

 >>One could observe that none of us were there, but the witness
 >>was. If the witness misidentified Venus after chasing the
 >object >for nearly two hours, what would make one thing that the
 >>witnesses didn't recognize exactly what they had been chasing
 >>for two hours?

 >>Huh? What sort of "logic" or "reason" is this? Looks purely
 >like >sleight-of-hand to me!

 >No, just two witnesses following what looked like the same thing
 >they had been following for the last two hours. Gerald Buchert
 >took a photo of the UFO at Mantua, Ohio, and it turned out to be
 >Venus.

 >>what was the object that rose up alongside the road, where the
 >>two police officers were investigating an abandoned vehicle, and
 >>brightly illuminated them and their patrol car? And when they
 >>began chasing this structured, craftlike thing across Ohio and
 >>Pennsylvania and several other police officers en route saw both
 >>the object at low level and the Ravenna police in hot pursuit,
 >>what was that? Venus?

 >Most likely. It rose up as the Earth turned, was low in the sky
 >during the "chase" and faded with morning.

I have posted a separate statement on this case.

 >>>To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >>>someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >>>original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >>>unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >>>show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >>>necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >>>more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

 >>No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
 >>craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
 >>this semantical game.

 >Because you demand that I must present eighteen seperate
 >proven hypotheses, but you don't have to do the same.

"Proven hypothesis" is an oxymoron. Just suggest a reasonable
hypothesis. And if you want to address all 18 cases at once,
propose a hypothesis to explain why so many people are reporting
unexplainable structured objects which display incredible
brightness, illumination, maneuverability, etc. We're not
talking about point sources of light here. The patterns of what
people are reporting are quite strong.

 >>You can falsify my hypothesis by offering convincing prosaic or
 >>mundane explanations for "my" 18 cases. You are off to a very
 >>poor start.

 >What if I simply concluded that the remaining 16 were
 >unexplained, because of a lack of information, something which
 >is likely in some of them.

 >We would then be faced with the matter of examining your
 >hypothesis to see if the ETH is the most likely answer. How
 >would we do that? Can you think of a way that your hypothesis
 >could be false?

 >You refuse to even think about it.

You are quite mistaken. If a small, strong sample of cases
remains unexplained and shows repeated patterns, it is time to
look at a much larger sample of the same kind of report. Once
you grasp the numbers and scope, and patterns, ETH comes
naturally.

Scientific instruments exist that, if applied to systematic
study of UFOs, could falsify the ETH. Complete release of all
the physical analyses, photoanalyses, radarscope photos, etc.,
known to exist in CIA and Air Force files could falsify the
hypothesis, if they contain no strong evidence of unexplained
UFOs showing the familar patterns.

 >Nine physical scientists who reviewed some of the same evidence
 >are a PR stunt because they didn't find UFOs. When I seek to
 >discuss facts presented by one of your references for one of
 >these 18, you accuse me of ignoring all of the "other
 >information" on the site.

I didn't call the Rockefeller panelists "a PR stunt." You are
misquoting me. The Haisch site was not "one of [my] references
for the case; it was one of yours, and misused at that. The
panel of scientists, in my estimation, were rather typical of
most scientists today: Probably totally ignorant of UFO reports
except by hearsay, probably extremely skeptical, demanding
absolute proof almost to the old "saucer in the laboratory" ploy
(where have I heard that before), and certainly very skittish
about their reputations.

Your citing this panel's views as if they were meaningful about
the ETH is somewhat akin to citing Menzel, or even Condon.


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:23:39 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:27:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 23:59:03 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:29:50 -0000

 >I posed this question to you:

 >>>To get back to the hypothesis, how would you propose that
 >>>someone might falsify your hypothesis? You mentioned in your
 >>>original article a number of reasons that the UFOs listed seemed
 >>>unusual, motion, characteristics, etc. If one were to be able to
 >>>show, as Dennis Stacy has suggested, that these were not
 >>>necessarily indicative of ET craft, but were also present in
 >>>more prosaic events, would this falsify your hypothesis?

 >You responded,

 >>No single case or small group of cases is "indicative of ET
 >>craft." You know that, I know that, so why do you keep playing
 >>this semantical game.

 >It is not my job to prove your claim by process of ellimination.
 >All that I must do is to assert that these objects are, at
 >present, unidentified.

Do you mean this last sentence literally? Of course they are
unidentified at present!

 >It is your burden, as the claimant, to prove your claim.  You
 >must show that in any of these cases, it was 1) a space ship,
 >and 2) that it was alien.  If you cannot do this, the hypothesis
 >remains unproven.

How many times do I have to go over this? I have never, never,
never claimed that looking at one (or two, or three) cases can
prove an ET origin. That has always been your insistence. And,
once again, you give evidence of not understanding what a
hypothesis is. Hypotheses are always "unproven." It requires a
lot of investigation to test competing hypotheses.

 >You had previously written,

 >>>>My position is and always has been that it is the cumulative
 >>>>evidence of many hundreds of cases of the type illustrated in this
 >>>>article (see UFOE-II), and associated physical evidence of
 >>>>various types, and recurring patterns closely similar or identical
 >>>>to the cases illustrated in this article, are what make the ETH
 >>>>the most likely interpretation. For purposes of the present debate,
 >>>>I am willing to base my argument on these 18 cases.

 >If you insist that there is cumulative evidence, then help me
 >out, here. What are the recurring patterns, those listed in the
 >original article?

Yes, pretty much. Without going back to re-read my article to
refresh my memory, my recollection is that I covered the
recurring patterns. And in my unmentionable book I cover them
ever so much more thoroughly, including dozens and hundreds of
examples.


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                    Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:07:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:50:38 -0400
Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"! - Hale


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: TLC - BFSB Is "Legendary"!
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:40:04 +0100

<snip>

 >On a subject that the media now consider tired
 >(certainly in the UK where media interest and
 >book sales on UFOs have plummeted in the past
 >year or so).

Hi,

Can you please publish your source of statistics, phones
ringing less does not count.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:11:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:52:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:39:15 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I think that the Gallup Poll, some years ago, got a response of
 >about 11 percent for the number of adult Americans who said that
 >they had seen a UFO, themselves.

 >That puts me with the other 89 percent people.


Hey Bob,

Come on print the real stats, you think?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Serious Research - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:20:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:54:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hale


 >From: Ron EagleBoy <eagle100@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:56:28 -0400

<snip>

Regarding the Zomara Case:

 >1. Too small to be a functional hot air balloon.


Ron,

The ludicrous notion is that James is telling Zomara what he
saw, a balloon... that was obviously way ahead of the type used
today... it was turbo charged, right, James?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                 Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18 - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:25:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:56:14 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18 - Hale


 >Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:50:22 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 18

 >GIANT SAUCER HOVERS OVER A TOWN IN DERBYSHIRE, UK

 >"The mystery of the UFO sightings over the Peaks and Dales" of
 >Derbyshire, UK "shows no signs of abating after the 23rd
 >reported sighting in the last 8 months."

 >"Since September (2000), locals have spoken of strange lights,
 >flying saucers and huge triangular craft in the skies. One was
 >even caught on video."


For more on this case check out this months UK UFO magazine,
full article on the case. If we are to believe certain readings
on this list, the media would not be bothered in such a case,
only this was published with pictures in The Daily Mail two
months back.

Such for no interest in UFOs.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                       Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:38:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:58:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100


 >I have no emotional investment in that at all because
 >I haven't got a clue - I'm simply interested in _why_
 >people believe they exist, and the lengths they will
 >go to pursuade and in some cases, browbeat, others
 >into adopting their questionable conclusions.


Dave,

Would you say you took the same stance in one of your last
writings for the Sheffield Star, prior to your sudden departure
after Max Burns was sentenced?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

              Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:32:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:59:41 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hale


 >Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 05:28:36 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >It would appear that there was no consistent annual
 >bellwether of public UFO interest or opinion. Polls are
 >attracted to the hot issues of the day, and if UFOs aren't much
 >discussed, there is no poll for a given year.

 >Hmmm. maybe the mere absence of any UFO poll is itself a good
 >indicator!


Hi Larry,

God damn those Robots! Larry kind of strange isn't it that a lot
of well known UFO faces here in the UK like wasting their time
and effort on a subject which they obviously interpret of having
no public interest, doesn't add up? Would this indicate of their
part, that their research into UFOs is purely on a personal
level, and not as it may seem to educate the UK public..who from
their accounts have no interest in the subject?

Now back to the Robots!


Best,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                    Re: Filer's Files #18 -- 2000 - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:45:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:01:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Filer's Files #18 -- 2000 - Hale


 >From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:44:13 EDT
 >Subject: Filer's Files #18 -- 2000
 >To: undisclosed-recipients:;


 >UNITED KINGDOM 23RD UFO SEEN OVER DALES IS GIANT DISC

 >DERBYSHIRE, ENGLAND -- Andy Darlington of the Matlock Mercury
 >Newspaper writes, "The mystery of UFO sightings over the Peaks
 >and Dales shows no signs of abating after the 23rd reported
 >sighting in the last eight months." Since September, locals have
 >spoken of strange lights, flying saucers, and huge triangular
 >craft in the skies.


Hey,

Another World Media Source picks it up! And interest in UFOs is
waining?

Always question....even if you get shouted down!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:10:46 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:06:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 11:16:00 -0300

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:17:18 -0500

 ><snip>

 >>And I still consider Menzel as unscientific, irrational,
 >>arrogant, overbearing and viciously anti, when it comes to UFOs
 >>as documented by Jim McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, Brad Sparks and
 >>others. But he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences
 >>and one of the top dogs in the astronomical community.

 >>As I noted in my IUR piece and in FROMJ-12 and in my Menzel
 >>Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC, I think he was playing a role for
 >>the MJ-12 group.

 ><snip>

 >>Stan

 >Jerry, Stan,

 >Pardon my present state of deshabille - I'm in the midst of
 >moving a ton of paper from one place to another - but what's
 >friendship got to do with it, anyway? If anything, it's a
 >detriment, not a bonus, as it tends to cloud judgment. It might
 >even hinder same.

 >You, Stan, and Budd Hopkins, could be the best friends on the
 >planet Earth, for example, and that wouldn't necessarily move us
 >one step closer to anything.

 >More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >- that should be your job.)

 >Prettty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >with yours?

I haven't seen the piece, but lets face it, Menzel's
Intelligence Community Background (NSA,CIA,ONI, etc) was NOT a
matter of public record. He couldn't even mention his Navy TOP
SECRET ULTRA Clearance during the pathetic Loyalty Hearing in
1950 where the USAF was trying to take away a mere SECRET
Clearance.Though Menzel described this as the worst experience
of his life.. I doubt very much if his close affiliation with
NSA, CIA,ONI, MJ-12 was known except to those involved in these
and having an appropriate need to know. USAF Colonel Madsen, the
Crash Test Dummy project leader, told me that, when at WPAFB, he
was doing some work on the U-2 Project that his own boss didn't
know about. He got a lousy rating because of it. It took the
project Manager to fix that.  Menzel could not parade his
Compartmented clearances. Remember, speaking of the NSA, he told
JFK "Properly cleared to one another, I should be able to help
in this sensitive area". NSA, CIA, MJ-12 were NOT USAF agencies.

Remember that it takes both an appropriate clearance and a
need-to-know to gain access to Compartmented information. Even
though Menzel had been cleared of disloyalty, his AF Secret
Clearance would not have been enough... Especially since an FBI
memo of 1/31/49 stated about Flying Saucers "This matter is
considered top secret by Intelligence Officers of both the Army
and the Air Forces".


 >Let's get even more interesting: Who, in your estimation, makes
 >up today's MJ-12? Who replaced Menzel? Who heads it up now? Who
 >are the other 11 members? And what proof do you have of same?

 >None. Nothing whatsoever.

I have no idea who makes up today's MJ-12.. undoubtedly under
another name. Very competent people having considerable freedom
of action, having strong intelligence background, known to be
discrete, and having very high Clearances and a Need to know. I
suspect it would still be a mix of civilian and military types
and include nobody who is an elected official.

Considering that the DCI has an annual black budget of more than
$26Billion, there should be plenty of people available. It
wouldn't surprise me if Dr. Jimmy Doolittle had been a member in
the past (lots of knowledge and quietly very active in the
Intelligence community, even doing a study of the CIA for Ike).
Frank Drake is another good candidate because of his high
security clearance when working on ECM in the Navy, his close
connection with Menzel both at Harvard and in the Cambridge
Naval Communications Unit 1 with Menzel, and at least 10 more
years in the Navy Reserve after getting his PhD at Harvard.

Do recall that I have been to 19 Archives and never saw any
special compartmented  (TOP SECRET CODE WORD) documents. The
Kennedy Library had 10 drawers of TS++ material, Even the Ike
had 1 drawer, and the Truman Library 1/2 a drawer. I couldn't
see any of it nor, so far as I know, could you.. I suppose, if I
had a research grant for a year, I could come up with a good
list of guesses.

 >And it's high time that Jerry Clark called you, Budd Hopkins,
 >and David Jacobs to account - as something other than friends.
 >But that ain't gonna happen, not in this lifetime, anyway.

 >Friends is as friends does, I guess. Meanwhile, accounts of
 >MJ-12 and alien abductions continue unabated.

 >While the US goverment covers it all up?

 >And you people refuse to understand how ridiculous such
 >assumptions are on their surface?


Dennis,

The problem is not us, but that people like you seem to have no
idea how easy it has been for known and unknown government
agencies to cover up Special Compartmented Information.
Remmember the Black Budgets. Throw in the abject failure of the
major news media to do their job and expose facts instead of
tabloid stuff, and also throw in the high sounding Tabloid
nonsense from Carl Sagan, Jill Tartar and others, and the
coverup is easy. Laughter is one of the best medicinces.. for
keeping things under wraps.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                   Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 17:42:20 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:07:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Hale


 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...

<snip>

 >"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
 >of UFO reports.

 >Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
 >wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.

 >John Rimmer


John,

Are you sure your a resident of the UK? Haven't you read and
seen over the last 15yrs, UK Goverments involved in scandals,
ranging from the Westland  affair, BSE, Secret pay offs, all
culminating in ministers having to resign, having been caught
out.

You obviously have whole hearted faith in goverment spin. Why
would this spin not extend to major UFO incidents here in the
UK, Rendlesham for example?

The loyal voter isn't a myth after all!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:16:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:09:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lehmberg


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus.

<snip>

 >Local police called their dispatcher and Air Force interceptors
 >were scrambled to investigate. The UFO could be seen in the
 >distance hovering and now appearing as a bright point of light.
 >As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >"straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >Bob says Venus. Jury?

I think Bob's _idea_ could be Venus; it's just not as bright. <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:59:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:11:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 10:48:56 -0700

 >Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
 >By Ed Gehrman


Unlike Ed, I found these files very revealing. I'll make just one
comment:

The FBI files on Corso say:

 >"As a matter of background, as previously indicated in
 >referenced memorandum, Corso is a self-styled intelligence
 >expert who retired from the military approximately 3 years ago,
 >and he has been working as one of Senator Strom Thurmond's many
 >assistants. He has been somewhat of a thorn in our side because
 >of self-initiated rumors, idle gossip and downright lies he has
 >spread to more or less perpetuate his own reputation as an
 >intelligence expert. His activities so far as we are concerned
 >are: [deleted subparagraph]."

<snip>

And Ed comments:

 >The FBI sent the Jones memorandum to Attorney General Katzenbach
 >who in turn showed it to Congressman Cellar, who then showed it
 >to Congressman Feighan who then wrote Hoover to complain. The
 >remainder is DeLoach's justification for his actions. This is a
 >political fight and should not be taking place in the FBI. What
 >are they doing maligning the character of a person without
 >regard to the truth of the matter? Yes, Col. Corso was a thorn
 >in their collective sides but he was telling it as he saw it.
 >He's a brave man who fought on many fronts. We should not be
 >disregarding the information he's supplied us.

In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
administration do something about the presence of Soviet
missiles in Cuba.

There's no basis whatsoever for this in the historical record.
It's especially revealing to read the verbatim transcripts of
White House discussions before, during, and after the Cuban
Missle crisis. If Corso had blown the whistle, and forced JFK to
act, don't you think his name would have come up rather
prominently? Needless to say, it doesn't.

Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.


Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                        Re: Serious Research - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:02:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:13:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sandow


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:49:49 +1200

 >Thanks Greg

 >This could be the time to define "skeptic" again?

 >From the same website:

 >www.ufoskeptic.org/

 >"Skeptic - One who practices the method of suspended judgment,
 >engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified
 >by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider
 >alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior
 >beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes
 >its validity"

 >and  continuing on from Greg's post, Haisch says.....

 >".....I see myself a bit like the kid standing next to the kid
 >looking through the hole in the big tall fence at the baseball
 >game. This means that the closest I am getting to inside
 >information will be a recounting of what is going on in there.

 >I myself am definitely not an insider, but certain contacts I
 >have acquired and/or befriended over a long period of time seem
 >to be on the periphery of some kind of inside which appears to
 >contain at least remarkable information, and apparently more
 >than that.

<snip>

And thanks to you, William.

Haisch's website is refreshing reading. He's a credentialed
astronomer who's willing to speculate about alien UFOs. He's
cautious intellectually - he doesn't jump to conclusions - but
not cautious professionally. He doesn't pull his punches just to
keep from getting in trouble.

www.ufoskeptic.org

Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:27:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:15:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy


Jerry, List

I only got in a fight once as a teenager, and in the end it
turned out to be as much Farce as Fight.

One night a car full of juniors pulled up alongside the car of
seniors I was in, and the usual obscene gestures were exchanged.
We pulled into a parking lot to sort things out. When the junior
I'd gestured to got out, he looked, um, rather larger than he
had sitting down. So I hit the guy next to him instead. We
rolled around on the ground for awhile, with everyone else
standing around us, then got up, kissed, and made up. Hey, we
were in the same school and played on the same team, after all.

Recently, I made some rude comments about some people on this
thread, not because they were the real targets of my anger, but
because they were... available.

So, who was I picking a fight with, and why was I picking a
fight in the first place?

I'm afraid my disgust meter with what passes for much of ufology
in this country finally boiled over. There was no final straw.
What's the use of singling out individual strands, anyway, when
you're basically dealing with a big bale of hay?

Maybe it was more MJ-12 document mumbo-jumbo from the Woods duo,
more sheer Greer lunacy in Washington, or yet another Roswell
artifact a la Leir. Whatever, it was (or is) The Week That Was
for Ufology, the week that the inmates launched their most
serious assault on the asylum yet. This has always been a
potential, recurring threat, of course, but there's a big
difference this time: the inmates are now better funded than the
Old Guard administrators are.

You could say American ufology is at a crossroads.

It's no longer a question of whether the UFO glass is half-full
or half-empty. It's a question of how much arsenic (or sewage)
is in the water in the first place.

Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking.

My apologies to my secondary targets: I was aiming at someone
else.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                       Re: Ravenna 1966 - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:28:08 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:17:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Cuthbertson



 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began

 >...  large glowing structured (disc-like) object ...
 >...  making a humming sound.

 >... continuing to lluminate the ground via an inverted cone of
 >... light (narrower at the bottom) from its underside.

 >... As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >... jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >"... straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >Bob says Venus. Jury?


 >Dick Hall

This jury member suggests Bob is guilty of deliberately ignoring
wholesale evidence to the contrary. He should be sentenced to
writing on the blackboard 500 times:

    * Venus is not disk-shaped
    * Venus does not hum
    * Venus does not emit inverted light cones
    * Venus does not zoom straight up and disappear
      when Air Force jets approach

Unless he can prove of course that Venus does exhibit the above
properties.


-Brian C.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                  Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:00:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:19:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Clark


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:32:43 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun...


 >>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...


Don,

 >>"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
 >>of UFO reports.

 >>"In Los Angeles there were dozens of reports of three silvery
 >>disc-shaped objects that 'changed formation as if playing tag
 >>in the sky', and appeared to be 'leaping over each other'. A
 >>squadron of jets went up to search for the objects, but returned
 >>unsuccessful.

 >>"It was suggested at first that they were weather baloons, but
 >>the Weather Bureau reported that no balloons were aloft. Then
 >>came the final explanation - the objects were inland pelicans!"

 >>Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
 >>wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.

 >Yes, probably. I see you are finally getting the hang of it,
 >John.

Well said, Don. Based on their dismal history, "official"
explanations of ostensible UFO sightings should be judged wrong
virtually by definition, unless proved otherwise. Official
explainers seem incompetent even at identifying IFOs properly.
His clumsy sarcasm aside, John is right for once.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 7

                         Re: Ravenna 1966 - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:03:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:21:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Friedman


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began
 >when Portage County Deputy Sheriffs Spaur and Neff were out of
 >their cruiser investigating an abandoned automobile in early
 >morning. A large glowing structured (disc-like) object rose up
 >out of the woods, moved toward them and stopped overhead,
 >brightly illuminating them and the local environment. It was
 >making a humming sound.

 >On instructions from their dispatcher, they began following it
 >as it moved away at about 300-500 feet altitude, continuing to
 >illuminate the ground via an inverted cone of light (narrower at
 >the bottom) from its underside. As the object moved, it wobbled
 >slightly so that the cone of light rocked back and forth. A
 >high-speed chase ensued, with the object alternately speeding
 >away into the distance, and then stopping until they caught up
 >with it again.

 >In East Palestine, Ohio, police from a separate jurisdiction
 >were monitoring their communications and saw (looking westerly)
 >the UFO arrive at their location at relatively low level with
 >the Portage County cruiser in hot pursuit. They wheeled around
 >and joined in the chase, which ended in Conway, Pennsylvania.

 >Local police called their dispatcher and Air Force interceptors
 >were scrambled to investigate. The UFO could be seen in the
 >distance hovering and now appearing as a bright point of light.
 >As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >"straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >Bob says Venus. Jury?


Definitely _not_ Venus!

I should note that it is really funny to hear Blue Book boss
Hector Quintanilla, on a tape made by Bill Weitzel, try to
convince the policemen that it must have been Venus.

People would understand why I use the term 'noisy negativists'.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                      'NICAP UFO Investigators' Needed

From: Rod Dyke <RodBD@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 20:32:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:32:28 -0400
Subject: 'NICAP UFO Investigators' Needed


Dear fellow researchers:

I am trying to complete my personal research archives. Your help
in any way is greatly appreciated!

The following listed items are WANTED and/or FOR TRADE.

My prime needs and wants are listed, but will also trade for
many other items not listed... let me know what you have to
offer! I prefer _originals_ if at all possible! I will also be
glad to purchase those items wanted, if you do not wish to
trade! Let me know what you have and what you want for them!


NOTE:
[ * after issue listed means I have a xerox but need an original]
[ + after issue listed means I need a better condition original]

Notice: I will also buy whole collections of UFO/Fortean type
materials outright! Let me know what you have to offer... no
collection is to large!

[last update: 5.01.01]


================================================================
NICAP: UFO INVESTIGATOR - [July 1957 to June 1980, Wash.DC]
================================================================

[Originals Wanted]:

1963: Vol 2 #8 [Mar-Apr]
1970: Dec
1978: Jun, Jul, Aug, Oct-Nov, Dec
1979: Jan, Feb, Mar
1980: Apr

[Duplicates for TRADE]:

Vol 1: # 3, 7
Vol 2: # 5+, 6, 7+, 9, 10, 11
Vol 3: # 1, 2, 3, 5, 6+, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12+
Vol 4: # 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Vol 5: # 1
1970: May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct
1971: Jan, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1972: Jan, Feb, Mar, May, Jun, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1973: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1974: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1975: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1976: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Oct, Nov, Dec
1977: Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
1978: Jan, Feb, Mar-Apr, May,
1979: Dec
1980: Jan

================================================================
NICAP QUARTERLY REVIEW - [Vol 1: #1-4 to Vol 2: #1-4, 1973-74]
================================================================

[Duplicates for TRADE]:

Vol 2: # 2, 4
_______________________________________________________________

Thank you for your help!... I will trade for other publications
too... I have over 1,200 duplicate UFO periodicals for
trade... let me know what you need and what you have for trade!
Send your list and I will send you mine!


Rod


============================================
Roderick B. Dyke
Golden Age Collectables, Ltd
1501 Pike Place Market
401 Lower Level
Seattle, Washington 98101

Email me direct: Rodbd@aol.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                           THE WATCHDOG - 05-07-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 05:25:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:36:01 -0400
Subject: THE WATCHDOG - 05-07-01



UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"
http://www.ufowtchdog.com

***NEWS***
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/news.html

~ New Footage In Ongoing Washington Stated Case
~ Alleged roswell Debris Is No More
~ 'UFO Cam' Coming Soon
~ Official Disclosure Near?
~ Pilot Encounters With UFOs - Study Challenges Secrecy

***OF INTEREST***

HEY! SPEAK UP! Speak your mind and tell UFOWATCHDOG.COM what
you're thinking! Your thoughts, views and comments wanted - How
do you view the current state of UFOlogy? Send comments to:
ufowatchdog@earthlink.net

~Ad *First Annual Northwest UFO/Paranormal Conference* Ad~
http://www.seattleartbellchatclub.com/NWUFO.html
UFOWATCHDOG.COM will be covering this conference...

***BY POPULAR DEMAND***
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/dirtbagapr.html

UFO Dirtbag of the Month for May 2001 - Back by popular demand!
Jonathan Reed, Robert Raith and the Reed Hoax. Look for updated
section soon and a report on Reed's latest presentation of his
UFO hoax in San Diego. The presentation was reportedly given
without a question and answer session for the audience...










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                        Re: Serious Research - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:33:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:46:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Clark


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:02:47 -0400

 >>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:49:49 +1200


Greg and William,

 >>"Skeptic - One who practices the method of suspended judgment,
 >>engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified
 >>by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider
 >>alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior
 >>beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes
 >>its validity"

 >Haisch's website is refreshing reading. He's a credentialed
 >astronomer who's willing to speculate about alien UFOs. He's
 >cautious intellectually - he doesn't jump to conclusions - but
 >not cautious professionally. He doesn't pull his punches just to
 >keep from getting in trouble.

A terrific new book, Henry H. Bauer's 'Science or Pseudoscience'
(University of Illinois Press, 2001), addresses - along with
many other interesting, relevant issues - the subject of what a
"skeptic" is. Bauer argues, as some of us on this List have
done, that self-described "skeptics" are giving themselves too
much credit:


"The 'skeptical' in Skeptical Inquirer and the 'skeptics' in the
names of many groups employing that label interprets skepticism
in the sense of those ancient Greeks who actively _dis_believed,
the _a_theists, rather than in the nowadays more commonly
understood sense of agnostics, people who suspend judgment, who
maintain an attitude of doubt.

CSICOP and its 'Skeptics' are doubtful only about unorthodox
beliefs, which they judge in the light of the contemporary
scientific knowledge that they do _not_ doubt.

Those who doubt what the 'skeptics' believe... are called
'fringe', 'pseudoscientific,' and the like by these self-styled
'skeptics'.

In point of literal fact, anomalists could call themselves
'skeptics' with just as much warrant as those who debunk
pseudoscience, since anomalists are genuinely skeptical in
relation to much of currently accepted scientific theory (though
not usually of scientific knowledge, which is by no means to be
equated with scientific theory)."


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 16:40:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:48:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Ledger


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began
 >when Portage County Deputy Sheriffs Spaur and Neff were out of
 >their cruiser investigating an abandoned automobile in early
 >morning. A large glowing structured (disc-like) object rose up
 >out of the woods, moved toward them and stopped overhead,
 >brightly illuminating them and the local environment. It was
 >making a humming sound.

<snip>

 >Bob says Venus. Jury?


Hi Dick,

Bob always sez Venus or a meteor. He once had a job in a record
factory and he's stuck in a groove.

I'm just needling him.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                       Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 19:42:45 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:51:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:27:22 -0500

 >Jerry, List

 >So, who was I picking a fight with, and why was I picking a
 >fight in the first place?

 >I'm afraid my disgust meter with what passes for much of ufology
 >in this country finally boiled over. There was no final straw.
 >What's the use of singling out individual strands, anyway, when
 >you're basically dealing with a big bale of hay?

 >Maybe it was more MJ-12 document mumbo-jumbo from the Woods duo,
 >more sheer Greer lunacy in Washington, or yet another Roswell
 >artifact a la Leir. Whatever, it was (or is) The Week That Was
 >for Ufology, the week that the inmates launched their most
 >serious assault on the asylum yet. This has always been a
 >potential, recurring threat, of course, but there's a big
 >difference this time: the inmates are now better funded than the
 >Old Guard administrators are.

 >You could say American ufology is at a crossroads.

 >It's no longer a question of whether the UFO glass is half-full
 >or half-empty. It's a question of how much arsenic (or sewage)
 >is in the water in the first place.

 >Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking.

 >My apologies to my secondary targets: I was aiming at someone
 >else.

Dennis,

A very gracious apology. I missed Jerry's post so am unaware of
the full context. However, as I think you know, I strongly share
your sentiments about the sewage level in the half full/half
empty glass of ufology.

Greer and his disciples are particularly abominable, but there
is much garbage being spread on other fronts as well. Con men
tend to thrive when there is a vacuum in leadership, and when
uncritical "ufologists" can't see through their games.


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                        Re: Serious Research - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:11:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:02:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:42:36 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:33:59 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 12:51:44 -0000

 ><snip>

 >>Regarding your case #13, The Cash Landrum Case, let's address
 >>the illogic of the incident as evidence for an Extraterrestrial
 >>craft:

<snip>

Hi Don, Bob, everybody,

Don wrote:

 >I think the physical evidence - the health of the witnesses, and
 >the burned patch on the highway should be worthy of
 >consideration.

Just to show you how something can be taken as many different
ways as there are people looking at it:

When the Cash/Landrum case came up in this thread I questioned
its inclusion (one of Richard's 18) because I always thought of
it as a 'good case' for the existence of retro-engineered
military "UFOs." (!) Not an 'ET' one.

Young Bob made a _valid_ point that shouldn't be allowed to get
lost in the shuffle. When Bob questioned whether the case argued
well for assuming an ET origin of the craft, I had to agree with
him that it doesn't. Mostly because, we don't know the origin
of the craft in question.

My 'take' on the testimony:

1. I don't think those helicopters were "chasing" the 'UFO'. The
reports sound more like they were escorting it, or pacing
it. Bob is right when he says that it doesn't make any sense to
send helicopters to "chase" a UFO. (Unless it's a man on foot
or a slo-mo O.J. Simson SUV chase scene.)

2. The burned section of roadway and the nature of the symptoms
that Betty manifested, (as a result of her exposure to the
craft) both argue for the presence of 'dirty' - radiation -
spewing technology.

That ground-hugging, radiation spewing contraption sounds more
like something _we'd_ be mucking around with than it is
indicative of an advanced or other-world technology. If it's
that 'dirty' and it wasn't working very well... it sounds more
like it's one of our own prototypes in the test stages of
development.

Add to that the fact that the UFO appeared to be being escorted
by a bunch of military helicopters, and it argues well for 'one
of ours', not one of ET's.

 From the first time I heard the details of the Cash/Landrum case
I never thought of it as an 'ET craft' case. As nutty as it
sounds, I always thought it made a better case for the argument
that US military (retro-engineered) 'ET technology' programs do
in fact exist. (Area 51/Lazar type stuff)

For my money, the 'warping and morphing' Nellis craft recording
makes a stronger case for 'ET origin' (even though that one
appeared _on_ a military base) than the craft described in the
Cash/Landrum case.

It's so hard to keep all the ducks in a neat little row with
this UFO stuff. They never seem to want to go where you are
trying direct them. ;)


Regards to all,

John Velez

As mystified and confused as the next guy. ;)



                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                 Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 17:16:44 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:09:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:59:59 -0400

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 10:48:56 -0700

 >>Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
 >>By Ed Gehrman

 >Unlike Ed, I found these files very revealing. I'll make just
 >one comment:

 >The FBI files on Corso say:

 >>"As a matter of background, as previously indicated in
 >>referenced memorandum, Corso is a self-styled intelligence
 >>expert who retired from the military approximately 3 years ago,
 >>and he has been working as one of Senator Strom Thurmond's many
 >>assistants. He has been somewhat of a thorn in our side because
 >>of self-initiated rumors, idle gossip and downright lies he has
 >>spread to more or less perpetuate his own reputation as an
 >>intelligence expert. His activities so far as we are concerned
 >>are: [deleted subparagraph]."

 ><snip>

 >And Ed comments:

 >>The FBI sent the Jones memorandum to Attorney General Katzenbach
 >>who in turn showed it to Congressman Cellar, who then showed it
 >>to Congressman Feighan who then wrote Hoover to complain. The
 >>remainder is DeLoach's justification for his actions. This is a
 >>political fight and should not be taking place in the FBI. What
 >>are they doing maligning the character of a person without
 >>regard to the truth of the matter? Yes, Col. Corso was a thorn
 >>in their collective sides but he was telling it as he saw it.
 >>He's a brave man who fought on many fronts. We should not be
 >>disregarding the information he's supplied us.

 >In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
 >administration do something about the presence of Soviet
 >missiles in Cuba.

 >There's no basis whatsoever for this in the historical record.
 >It's especially revealing to read the verbatim transcripts of
 >White House discussions before, during, and after the Cuban
 >Missle crisis. If Corso had blown the whistle, and forced JFK to
 >act, don't you think his name would have come up rather
 >prominently? Needless to say, it doesn't.

 >Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.


There are other serious problems with Lieutenant Colonel Corso's
claims, such as his falsely claiming in a sworn statement to
attorney Peter Gersten that he had been a member of the National
Security Council.

He refused to withdraw that claim when Peter showed him a copy
of a letter from the Ike Library to me noting that Corso had
never been a member of the NSC and had never attended an NSC
meeting.

A Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded not long ago for work done
in 1958, that Corso claimed he had provided to industry in 1961
from alien technology.

His own son in a public forum (which he wouldn't allow to be
taped) in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, (Journey's Beyond
Conference) last fall, claimed that only 10% of the book was
worthwhile because Corso had not been able to review it.

Corso claimed to be head of the Foreign Tech. Div of the Army
under Trudeau.

The full 4-legal page roster for about June, 1961, showed two
people in the FTD group at that time. Corso was the junior
officer.

There is more in an article on my web site:

www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 08:49:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:12:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:23:00 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

<snip>

 >I agree Steve. It would be nice to think that this is going to
 >make a difference. Somehow I doubt it. Why the Hell should the
 >gubbamint suddenly do a 180 on a policy that it has so staunchly
 >maintained for half a century or more? Because Greer serves them
 >watercress sandwiches at a VIP luncheon? I don't think so.

Maybe with thin slices of good cheese.  -LH

 >Unless he has some rock solid cases to present, the press is
 >going to have a field day debunking it while setting ufology
 >back 20 years. According to what I've heard from Jan and some
 >others about the material he plans to present, setting ufology
 >back is precisely what will happen. As I mentioned before, that
 >may in fact be the 'purpose' of the whole exercise.

 >What is needed is a _grass roots_ popular movement for
 >disclosure. Not this 'solo flight' disguising as a 'mandate from
 >the people' that Greer has engineered. He set up a three ring
 >circus with himself as the "Ringmaster." Politicians respond to
 >$$$ and votes. In that order. Not to "personalities." This whole
 >thing is a 'personality driven' venture _for_ Greer.

 >>If anyone has any leads as to who will be attending the VIP
 >>Luncheon or meetings on Capitol Hill, I would be most
 >>interested.

 >Somebody else asked, and I'd like to reiterate the question,
 >"Where is the $$$ for all this coming from?" This little side
 >show has got to cost a bundle to produce. There is 'serious
 >money' behind this somewhere. I wonder where it originates.


Hello John:

On one list or another recently, was an impassioned plea to the
public for donations of any size. I don't have it handy, but
would suppose that a lot of the money for this event does in
fact come from the so-called grass-roots... something like
televangelism.

I would also like to see a list of who attended, more for grins
than anything else.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:33:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:26:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 00:20:11 -0400

 >>Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 14:03:57 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 ><snip>

 >>Hello Steve:

 >>Question: Have you or anyone else seen the price of upgrading
 >>participation in this event, from the basic dumb-rube rate up to
 >>the VIP Luncheon in-crowd ticket?

 >>Clearly, somebody has to pay for all those luncheon snacks, not
 >>to mention a chance to meet Dr. Greer in person.

 >>Hopefully there will be lots of cameras rolling

<snip>

 >Hi Larry-

 >Yeah. There's a lot of money involved in this, with the initial
 >briefing to be webcast "live" there has to be enough to cover
 >the connection cost and the equipment (since that isn't a
 >standard package offered by the National Press Club).

 >I requested an invitation for myself and the Chairman of the
 >Fund for UFO Research, but we were told that the briefing on
 >Wednesday was only for current members of the working press, and
 >that request was denied. I was advised that if I could get a
 >Member of Congress to attend the VIP Luncheon (I just happen to
 >work at the U.S. House), I could tag along. No cost was
 >mentioned, and I've seen nothing to indicate that tickets are
 >being sold to anyone. I would add that it is unlikely that the
 >press will be encouraged to give much publicity to the VIP
 >event, as there may be some desire to let attendees remain
 >anonymous. In the political environment of DC that would be
 >normal procedure, and the press would do its part to try and
 >find out what happened and who was there.

Do I perceive an unwelcome mat for the more serious UFO groups
and individuals... i.e. those who might view these matters with
some degree of healthy skepticism?

 >The all day public event on Saturday is reportedly free, but
 >seating is limited to about 300.

 >I would also be interested in knowing of any admission charges
 >to any of these events.

<snip>

 >From what I can see on the local front, this is a non-event as
 >far as the public is concerned. There has been no publicity
 >about it, except for the mentions we've seen on the Internet. If
 >there's any hope of getting the public to the event on Saturday,
 >then it will have to come from the massive publicity expected to
 >result from the "disclosures" on Wednesday. Unfortunately, the
 >press in DC isn't very sympathetic to the subject of UFOs, and
 >getting good publicity is going to be tough.

 >It's going to be an interesting week.


Well, the Art Bell show performance should have provided plenty
of publicity. The Bell audience seems highly receptive to
extraordinary claims, they might ultimately be a major source of
funding as well.


Best


- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:32:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:35:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 08:46:21 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >The following is now making the rounds of UFO related email
 >lists. We're now being encouraged to donate money to the
 >cause.....Note the number of email lists this was sent to.

 ><begin quote>

 >To: "[B] CT" <Conspiracy-Theory@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO51" <ufo51_2000@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO2U" <UFO2U@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] SKY WATCH" <skywatch_discussion@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] DISCUSS UFO" <discuss-ufo@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] REAL UFOS" <RealUFOs@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] SKY OPEN" <Skyopen@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO DISCLOSURE" <UFO-Disclosure@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO HOTLINE" <UFO_HOTLINE_BULLETI@egroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO STUDIES" <ufostudies@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFOINFO" <ufoinfo@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFONET" <ufonet@yahoogroups.com>,
 > "[B] UFO-TALK" <ufotalk@yahoogroups.com>

 >[Interesting that P-47, C.E., & UpDates were not included --ebk]

 >From: "World-Action" <michaeli@globalnet.co.uk>
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 22:56:12 +0100
 >Subject: [discuss-ufo] Re: DISCLOSURE - Steven Greer on Art Bell Show

 >Forward from Debbie of CSETI & Disclosure Project:

 >Thanks Michael.

 >Please tell people that there is a link on the Web
 >site with information on how to donate money.

 >www.disclosureproject.org/donations.htm

 >It allows for using PayPal, which is secure and works
 >internationally - credit cards or from bank accounts.
 >They don't need to email me :)

<snip>

Hello Bobby and EBK.

1) It is indeed interesting that P-47, C.E. and this List were
excluded. Somehow I got copied on the over-unity electrical
generators, cures for clinical depression, and of course the
upcoming CSETI disclosure, c/o "The World Gathering for Truth".

I'm not on any of the Lists Bobbie kindly provided, and must
have been included as an individual. Don't ask me how.

It would appear that the less discriminating groups were
specifically targeted, while those with more acumen than free
money were passed over.

I somehow knew that the plate would get passed. The contact to
send all those dollar and pound checks is ..
<webmaster@disclosureproject.org>

Here is the corresponding website:

http://www.disclosureproject.org/

Surprise!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

             Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:05:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:37:25 -0400
Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding - Hatch


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:32:40 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >>Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 05:28:36 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: British Flying Saucer Bureau's Folding

 >>It would appear that there was no consistent annual
 >>bellwether of public UFO interest or opinion. Polls are
 >>attracted to the hot issues of the day, and if UFOs aren't much
 >>discussed, there is no poll for a given year.

 >>Hmmm. maybe the mere absence of any UFO poll is itself a good
 >>indicator!

 >Hi Larry,

 >God damn those Robots! Larry kind of strange isn't it that a lot
 >of well known UFO faces here in the UK like wasting their time
 >and effort on a subject which they obviously interpret of having
 >no public interest, doesn't add up? Would this indicate of their
 >part, that their research into UFOs is purely on a personal
 >level, and not as it may seem to educate the UK public..who from
 >their accounts have no interest in the subject?

 >Now back to the Robots!

Hello Roy:

I was referring to past years when UFO interest seemed to be
much lower, and there were no UFO polls as other matters took
the limelight.

Frankly, I see the last 20 years as an era of relatively high
public UFO interest or awareness, while better UFO sightings
counts are/were in the doldrums.

I'm glad you like Raging Robots. The best dumb things are
simple.


Best

- Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:14:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:40:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:59:59 -0400

 >>Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
 >>By Ed Gehrman

 >Unlike Ed, I found these files very revealing. I'll make just one
 >comment:

Revealing??? How? Why?

 >The FBI files on Corso say:

 >>"As a matter of background, as previously indicated in
 >>referenced memorandum, Corso is a self-styled intelligence
 >>expert who retired from the military approximately 3 years ago,
 >>and he has been working as one of Senator Strom Thurmond's many
 >>assistants. He has been somewhat of a thorn in our side because
 >>of self-initiated rumors, idle gossip and downright lies he has
 >>spread to more or less perpetuate his own reputation as an
 >>intelligence expert. His activities so far as we are concerned
 >>are: [deleted subparagraph]."

 ><snip>

 >And Ed comments:

 >>The FBI sent the Jones memorandum to Attorney General Katzenbach
 >>who in turn showed it to Congressman Cellar, who then showed it
 >>to Congressman Feighan who then wrote Hoover to complain. The
 >>remainder is DeLoach's justification for his actions. This is a
 >>political fight and should not be taking place in the FBI. What
 >>are they doing maligning the character of a person without
 >>regard to the truth of the matter? Yes, Col. Corso was a thorn
 >>in their collective sides but he was telling it as he saw it.
 >>He's a brave man who fought on many fronts. We should not be
 >>disregarding the information he's supplied us.

 >In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
 >administration do something about the presence of Soviet
 >missiles in Cuba.

Yes, he does say that: pgs. 253-257. But this is a very
complicated story.

There is no reason that I can see that this bit of information
would harm Col. Corso's reliability. Do you have the book at
your side? What is your take on this section of the book?

 >There's no basis whatsoever for this in the historical record.
 >It's especially revealing to read the verbatim transcripts of
 >White House discussions before, during, and after the Cuban
 >Missle crisis. If Corso had blown the whistle, and forced JFK to
 >act, don't you think his name would have come up rather
 >prominently? Needless to say, it doesn't.

Of course it wouldn't. He was a confidential source. He was
unknown to those outside of the power center. A modern example
is Richard Armitage(sp?), Secretary Powell's best friend. Have
you read Day After Roswell? Carefully?

 >Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.

Did stories appear in the Boston Globe and the Washington Post
re Cuba and missile bases? I don't know the answer; perhaps
someone on the list can help. Is there anyone who has read 'The
Day After Roswell'? Why not chime 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 8

               Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 20:30:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:43:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Cecchini


 >From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"
 >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600

 >Despite what Guy Malone thinks, "they" do not profess to be
 >gods, and they do not call us gods. They do not believe Jesus
 >is the Son of God, nor do they understand the Trinity... Father,
 >Son and Holy Ghost

If you believe all that Judeo-Christian stuff, then how come you
don't believe the ET's are 'innately evil', as you say later on?

I'm not trying to turn this into a debate between the New Age
and mainstream ("fire and brimstone") Christian interpretations,
etc.

I've just been curious for a while now how a person can claim to
be a Bible-believing Christian, which includes all that Prophecy
stuff, and still believe that alleged ET's are purely natural,
intelligent beings from another planet that somehow made their
way over here - all of which directly implies, to me, that the
J-C God is allowing ET to potentially muck with his End Times
plans for Humanity.

How do you reconcile these views?

 >But, they do believe in an Almighty Creator of the Universe
 >(not them and not us), and quote; "We value life, all life."

Tell that to all those poor cows...

With all the "lips and <buttocks>" they've been carving out
of/off of our Moo-Moo's, me-thinks ET has a hankering for Slim
Jims...










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                          Filer's Files #19 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 21:18:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:26:49 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #19 -- 2000


Filer's Files #19 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
May 8, 2001, Sponsored by Electronic Arts; Majorstar@aol.com.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,

UFOs OBSERVED AROUND THE US: Reports of UFOs continue from New
Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida,
Kentucky, Illinois, and California. The Disclsoure Project may
help disclose Star Wars and UFOs and Air Safety.

PRESIDENT PUSHES FOR SPACE BASED WEAPONS

Washington Times headlines for May 2 stated, "Bush favors
space-based arms for missile defense" A new push for SDI (Stars
Wars) weaponry is now gathering force within the executive
branch. This is in addition to the Anti Ballistic Missile
systems proposals. The US and Russia are now allegedly allies.
The new 'Star Wars' proposals make me wonder who are we
fighting against?

THE CAMPAIGN FOR UFO DISCLOSURE will be broadcast on Wednesday,
May 9, 2001, Live at 9:00 AM Eastern time. Over twenty
military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific
witnesses will come forward at the National Press Club in
Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or
extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and
resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The
weight of this firsthand testimony, along with supporting
government documentation and other evidence, will establish
without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to
Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project which
is hosting the event.

Among the witnesses attending the event are: John Callahan,
former Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations
Branch, FAA; Master Sergeant Dan Morris, former US Air Force
and NRO operative with cosmic top secret clearance; Dr. Carol
Rosin, space missile defense consultant and former spokesperson
for Wernher Von Braun; Graham Bethune, retired Navy commander
pilot with a top-secret clearance; Michael Smith, former Air
Traffic Controller, US Air Force; Sergeant Clifford Stone,
United States Army; Lt. Col. Robert Salas, former SAC Launch
Controller, US Air Force and FAA, and myself Major George A.
Filer III, former Air Force Intelligence Officer and flier. We
are asking for Congressional, White House and UN action to
allow witnesses to testify under oath in open hearings. We are
requesting a Presidential Executive Order to protect witnesses
afraid of violating security oaths and to declassify documents
and secret projects for the benefit of all world citizens.
There are reports that CNN may also carry the broadcast if it
is a slow news day.

UFOs AND AIR SAFETY

Journalist Leslie Kean writes that, "In January, Agence France
Presse reported that a Siberian airport was shut for 11/2 hours
while a luminescent unidentified flying object hovered above
its runway." Although it's hard to imagine such an event-taking
place in the industrialized United States, a compelling October
2000 study by a retired aerospace scientist from NASA-Ames
Research Center shows that similar incidents have occurred in
American skies over the last 50 years. "Aviation Safety in
America -- A Previously Neglected Factor" presents more than
100 pilot and crew reports of encounters with unidentified
aerial phenomena (UAP) that appear to have compromised aviation
safety.

Author Richard F. Haines, formerly NASA's chief of the Space
Human Factors Office and a Raytheon contract scientist, is
chief scientist for the National Aviation Reporting Center on
Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), a research organization founded
last year. In stunning detail, pilots and crew describe a range
of geometric forms and lights inconsistent with known aircraft
or natural phenomena. Bizarre objects paced aircraft at
relatively near distances, sometimes disabling cockpit
instruments, interrupting ground communications, or distracting
the crew.

The data include 56 near misses. Impulsive responses by pilots
to an approaching high-speed object can be hazardous; in a few
cases, such violent evasive reactions injured passengers and
flight attendants. However, Haines states that there is no
threat of a collision caused directly by UAPs "because of the
reported high degree of maneuverability shown by the UAP."
While flying over Lake Michigan in 1981, TWA Capt. Phil Schultz
saw a "large, round, silver metal object" with dark portholes
equally spaced around the circumference that "descended into
the atmosphere from above," according to his hand-written
report. Schultz and his first officer braced themselves for a
mid-air collision; the object suddenly made a high-speed turn
and departed.

Veteran Japan Airlines 747 Capt. Kenju Terauchi reported a
spectacular prolonged encounter over Alaska in 1986. "Most
unexpectedly, two space ships stopped in front of our face,
shooting off lights," he said. "The inside cockpit shined
brightly and I felt warm in the face." Despite the Federal
Aviation Administration's determination that he and his crew
were stable, competent, and professional, he was grounded for
speaking out. In 1997, a Swissair Boeing 747 over Long Island
just missed a glowing, white, cylindrical object speeding
toward the plane. According to an FAA Civil Aviation Security
Office memorandum, pilot Philip Bobet said that "if the object
was any lower, it may have hit the right wing."

Ground-systems operators have also been affected by UAP. "The
element of surprise means a decrease in safety because it
diverts the attention of air-traffic controllers that should be
focused on landing planes. That is a danger," says Jim
McClenahen, a recently retired FAA air-traffic-control
specialist and NARCAP technical adviser. "Aviation Safety in
America" does not attempt to explain the origin of these
mysterious objects. But Haines writes that hundreds of reports,
some dating back to the 1940s, "suggest that they [UAPs] are
associated with a very high degree of intelligence, deliberate
flight control, and advanced energy management."

In the 1950s, pilots and crews reported seeing flying discs,
cigar-shaped craft with portholes, and gyrating lights, all
with extraordinary technical capabilities. Documents show the
unexplained objects were considered a national security
concern. By order of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, commercial
pilots were required to report sightings and the unauthorized
release of a UFO report could cost them 10 years in prison or a
$10,000 fine. To keep this information from the public,
officials ridiculed and debunked legitimate sightings, angering
some pilots. According to the Newark Star Ledger in 1958, more
than 50 commercial pilots who had reported sightings, each with
at least 15 years of major airline experience, blasted the
policy of censorship and denial as "bordering on the absolutely
ridiculous."

These pilots said they were interrogated by the Air Force,
sometimes all night long, and then "treated like incompetents
and told to keep quiet," according to one pilot. "The Air Force
tells you that the thing that paced your plane for 15 minutes
was a mirage or a bolt of lightening," he told the Star-Ledger.
"Nuts to that. Who needs it?" As a result, many pilots "forget"
to report their sightings at all, one pilot said. According to
a 1952 Air Force Status Report on UFOs for the Air Technical
Intelligence Center, pilots were so humiliated that one told
investigators, "If a space ship flew wing-tip to wing-tip
formation with me, I would not report it." The vast majority of
sightings by American pilots are still not reported. The media
perpetuate the censorship and ridicule, handicapping the
collection of valuable data.

However, such dismissals may soon lose ground. Next Wednesday,
John Callahan, former division chief of the Accidents and
Investigations Branch of the FAA, will disclose FAA
documentation and subsequent CIA suppression of the Terauchi
encounter over Alaska. Callahan will be joined by more than 20
other government and military witnesses, and dozens more on
videotape, at a National Press Club briefing to challenge
official secrecy about this subject. Retired United Airlines
Capt. Neil Daniels, whose DC-10 was forced into a left turn
because of magnetic interference of cockpit compasses by a
brilliant UAP, is among the many who want change. "The energies
out there are absolutely profound," he says. "I think we need
to know what they are."

Leslie Kean is a journalist and author in the San Francisco Bay
area. ( lkean@ix.netcom.com.)
http://www.projo.com/cgi-bin/story.pl/opinion/05405261.htm

NEW JERSEY FAST MOVING OBJECTS

SUSSEX -- Brian Shaw writes that on May 6, 2001, at around 7:30
PM, my dad and I drove over a hill and got a good veiw of
strange things in the sky. They were shiny orange dots above
the mountains in the Sunset sky. We saw two objects. One was
either a disk or it was a meteor debris trail. It either went
below the horizon or simply disappeared, but as some vanished a
few more kept popping up. Some were spots and some were disk
shaped. My Mom saw one towards the end of the event, which was
definitely like a meteor. One was moving faster than the others
and left a trail behind it. The show ended as they all sank
below the horizon or just vanished. We definitely were not
imagining seeing these things, because other people were
staring up into the Northwest part of the sky just over the
Sunset. We saw at least ten or twelve objects there may have
been more. Thanks to Brian Shaw -- rico_suave_911@hotmail.com

Editor's Note: Last weekend, Earth passed through a trail of
dusty debris from distant Comet Halley, triggering the annual
eta Aquarid meteor shower. The nearly-full Moon reduced the
visibility of this year's shower. It seems unlikely you could
have seen these during sunset because of its light. Most of the
observations were seen in the south an hour before local
sunrise on Saturday and Sunday. It's a good chance you saw some
UFOs. For more information visit http://SpaceWeather.com

HAWTHORNE, NJ -- Tom Sheets and ISUR report that Daniel Dorval
saw a strange flying pyramid shaped flying object in June of
1998 at 10:15 PM. The object was thirty feet on a side and
fifty feet off the ground. It was all black and moved very
slow. There was no sound. Daniel says, "The craft had a mirror
like reflecting surface, because I could see my self in the
bottom as it passed over." Thanks to Tom Sheets and ISUR.

VIRGINIA FLYING TRIANGLE HOOVERS OVER TOWN

BUENA VISTA - The National Reporting Center reports that two
friends were walking home on April 25, 2001, when they looked
up into the sky and noticed a small triangular shaped craft at
3:40 AM. One witness stated, "We both looked to see if it could
possibly be wings of a plane, but there was no back end to the
plane." He says, "It had a bright 'headlight' leading its
course, that I myself have never seen on an airplane."
Extruding from the sides were small green lights on each end.
The witness explained, "I'm familiar with red lights on a
plane, but never in pairs." Even though the craft was flying at
low altitude, it was not making the slightest noise. Our town
was quiet as could be at 3:40 AM. The craft was hovering, not
as much flying. Although it was late, neither one of us were
drastically tired, intoxicated, nor had any drugs in our bodies
and are truthful behind what we saw. Although there are three
airports in a 50-mile radius, this craft was a strange flying
triangle with side green lights, and a bright headlight. Thanks
to Peter Davenport Director of NUFORC.

ROANOKE -- Andy and Robin Hodge writes, "Last week, you posted
our sighting of a pair of flying orbs on Monday, April 23rd in
Filer's Files #18 over Roanoke. My email address was included.
I thought you would like to know, we just received an email
from a fellow in Midlothian, Virginia who said he and his
girlfriend also saw a pair of flying orbs on Friday, April
27th. I just thought you would like to know that other is
seining the same things. :) Thanks to Robin Hodge
ahodge@roava.net

NORTH CAROLINA FLYING TRIANGLE

CHADBOURN -- The witness reports, I was in my yard on May 4,
2001, as we live in a rural area. We enjoy looking at the stars
my wife and I enjoy the evening stars. A strange craft shaped
like Flying Triangle flew over. At first, I thought it might be
a military aircraft, but my husband built aircraft, and said
that, "It was not one of ours, including area 51 special
aircraft."

SOUTH CAROLINA SIGHTING

MYRTLE BEACH -- Well on May 1,-2001, at exactly 10:00 PM, my
friend and I were walking on the beach, and we sat down looking
towards the Atlantic Ocean, We at first saw five lights all in
a line which kind of curved around. The object came half way
thought the clouds, then it started backing up slowly to the
right. A second object with five more lights became visible
while the other one was backing up. The one on the left then
disappeared, while the one to the right backed up really fast
and vanished. Now these lights to the left were all lined up in
the same pattern as the first set we saw. There was three
elderly people out there that saw the same thing. We all came
to the conclusion that it couldn't have been an airplane,
because it was to low to the ocean. It was not fireworks, and
they didn't make any sound at all! There were no boats out in
the ocean either. Thanks to Barry Taylor -stingray@nor.com.au

FLORIDA "UFO SIGHTING BY AUSTRALIAN

CAPE CANAVERAL -- I just returned from USA where the vast
majority do not believe in UFOs. Newspaper disinformation is
successful. I saw one strange craft in Central Florida (quick
white-red flash, erratic low flight over marsh) but nothing
close. More importantly, heard of new abduction case ca. 1990
just inland from Cape Canaveral, involving two very prominent
Florida citizens during 4:00 AM turkey shoot. There was a 100
meter craft overhead, 1.5 hours lost without memory, and scars
on both people afterward. The full report made it to top US law
officials, but there was no public notice. I referred to
reputable US investigators, may possibly come out if the
individuals are brave. Thanks to Woof, red collie Australia

SEBASTIAN -- On April 25, 2001, I saw the UFO approaching from
the northeast. "It was a big cylinder-shaped object with
something like a sphere on the front," he reported, "If I were
to guess, that is where they control the ship from. I know that
what I saw was something really odd and not a UFO but it looked
like one to me, for sure." " It was a silvery black cylinder
with a sphere on the front. It was way up there, maybe 30,000
feet (9,900 meters) and it moved slow at the beginning but then
began to move extremely quick" before departing to the
southwest. Thanks to UFO ROUNDUP Volume 6, Number 18 May 3,
2001 Editor: Joseph Trainor

KENTUCKY FLYING TRIANGLE

GLASGOW -- While driving on Cumberland Parkway the witnesses
noticed five white lights about 5 miles from the tollbooth in
Barren County on April 21, 2001. The series of lights were
shaped like a flying triangle moving slowly towards the
southeast at 8:00 PM. The witness stated, "It took about five
minutes for the object to intersect my truck at its zenith over
the toll both. I paid my toll, went down about 1/2 mile, and
pulled off to the shoulder of the road. The craft was very,
very low and the far-left light had a single red strobe. My
wife got out and we measured this object with our outstretched
arms. It was very huge and covered the distance of five human
hands at arm's length. It was like looking at a 747 a couple of
hundred feet above the tarmac at an airport. I was completely
amazed at the lack of engine noise. The witnesses stated, "The
object was triangle-shaped and similar to a boomerang, but with
well-defined sharp corners." They stood there for two minutes
as the craft slowly drifted a couple more degrees southeast.
While still directly above them the craft accelerated gaining
altitude. It moved rapidly past the horizon in about 15
seconds. By the time we got the camera and snapped a picture it
was too far away to get anything of use on the film. The city
of Louisville had its annual "Thunder over Louisville" that
same night so this event may be related to the air show. The
witness said, "I never saw an aircraft that low that did not
make an engine sounds. Additionally, it traversed 90 degrees of
sky in 15 seconds. Thanks to Peter Davenport

ILLINOIS SPHERES

WILDWOOD -- On April 26, 2001, the witness was looking out her
window, which gives a panoramic view of the East Grayslake. The
witness reports, "I saw two rather large glowing objects in the
distance at two minutes before midnight. They remained
stationary separately moved away after midnight." He stated, "I
was awestruck and was waiting for movement, but they continued
to hover for about five minutes when suddenly the lower left
craft started moving towards the west until I lost sight of
it." The object moved very fast, but it was not instantaneous.
The other object stayed, so he went to get binoculars from the
dinning room. Just as he got back to the window the object
started moving. He raised his binoculars, but before he could
focus the object started moving west. The objects were observed
as rather large lights, but they had an oblong symmetrical
shape. The witness stated, "While watching, I also had the
sensation that something zoomed past my window just above the
roof of my house. There was no noise. He said, "I feel they
were UFO's and that means just what it is intended to stand
for, "Un-Identified Flying Objects!"

CALIFORNIA FLIGHT OF SIX CHEVRON SHAPED CRAFT.

MANHATTAN BEACH -- On April 24, 2001, the witness observed a
craft from his roof top deck. He was lying in his hot tub at
9:25 PM and gazing up at the night sky when a flight of six
objects flew east at a high rate of speed. The witness lives on
the coastline, so the craft were coming in from over the ocean.
He did not know their altitude, but they high enough so no
details on the craft were visible. All craft appeared to be the
same and gave off a faint whitish glow (with a slight cast of
yellow), just enough to make them visible. The craft were in
perfect separation as they passed overhead. Three of the craft
broke off and changed heading to the east. The other three
maintained course for a couple seconds then joined up on the
first three. Perfect separation was maintained at all times. No
sound was heard. The craft disappeared several seconds' later,
still headed approximately 070 degrees. At first I thought they
were birds, then jets, since I used to fly A-4's fighters in
the service. What got me was the sudden brake off movement of
the first three, with no roll movement observed when they
changed course. They seemed to simply "translate" over, for
want of a better word. In addition, the speed seemed very high,
and the separation was too perfect. I have seen many flight
demonstration teams, but nothing like that. Flying that type of
perfect formation would be very difficult for a military jet.
In addition, some sort of roll movement is required to change
heading that quickly. Thanks to Jeff Rense and Sightings.

FRANCE: ARE UFOs MINING CHALK FOR UFO PROPULSION

I received a letter from Jo Glapan a former French College
professor. In gratitude for sending him my files, he sent a
copy of his book dealing with UFO propulsion, that I'm having
translated from French. He claims that UFOs use CaCO3 (Calcium
Carbonate) in their propulsion systems. This is mostly chalk or
calcareous earthly substance of opaque white colors, soft, and
easily pulverized. I think they have been robbing our planet
for thousands of years. That's why we find enormous caves under
the seas in the Bahamas or Australia. I hope my gritting ideas
will show you that our "formal science is not quite
honest-there are too many holes --- or lies. Thanks to Jo
Glapan

Editor's Note: Calcium Carbonate is a variety of limestone,
calcium and is composed mainly of small seashells but may
include bones, teeth, and plant ash. It is used in making lime.
Calcium Carbonate is a crystalline compound found mainly in
limestone, marble, and chalk. I was discussing Jo's letter with
Nancy Talbot who mentioned that most crop circles are sitting
on chalk or limestone. Its thought that water filtering through
the porous chalk soil attracts the electrical or microwave
energy that is associated with crop circles. We speculated that
UFOs are often seen near crop circles and there appears to some
relationship that Jo Glapan's statements would substantiate.
Earthlights or discharges of electrical ball lights are often
observed near Crop Circles. These crop circles in turn are
often situated near megalith prehistoric stone monuments such
as Stonehenge. These sites often include dolmens that are large
prehistoric tombs or monuments consisting of large, flat stones
laid across large upright stones. These monuments are found all
over the world often in circular configurations. These
monuments frequently contain electrically charged areas. I
personally visited many of these sites in England, Greece, and
Turkey. The sites are often tied to beliefs in healing, and
fertility. Through the ages people learned these sites helped
increase the growth of crops, the successful birth of off
spring, prosperity and happiness. A person who sees the
grandeur and intricacy of crop circles realizes that there is
some powerful force at work. In recent weeks the Earth has been
pounded by radiation from solar flares and coronal mass
discharges. It is reasonable to assume some of this energy does
more than light up the sky with Aurora Borealis (Northern
Lights). The incredible energy may react inside the chalk and
limestone soil creating the Crop Circles. I was wondering if
any of our readers are chemists, scientists, or electrical
engineers who would care to comment on these findings. The
first UFO book I read was by Ivan Sanderson called "Invisible
Residents." He contends that large numbers of UFOs are seen
entering and leaving the water.

COLOMBIA THREE UFOs OVER CAPITAL

BOGOT -- On April 23, 2001, at 4:15 PM, three UFOs were flying
over Bogot where more than 3,000 people in the city's business
district witnessed them. The objects were in the vicinity of
Cerro El Cable Hill where they remained motionless for four
minutes. This case was covered in detail last week. We wish to
thanks to Scott Corrales the Director of the Institute of
Hispanic Ufology for the Spanish "Translation (C) 2001.
IHU.William Chavez" IHU, and Louise Lowry.

THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION

David E. Twichell writes, "The ancient astronaut and Biblical
UFO hypotheses are not new. However, no one seems to want to
take the matter to the next logical step. If Ezekiel's, "wheel
within a wheel," and Moses', "pillar of fire and cloud," were
forerunners of today's UFOs, then the Star of Bethlehem and the
brilliant cloud to which Jesus ascended must be treated in the
same vein. When Biblical descriptions of anomalous aerial
phenomena are overlaid on that of modern-day UFO reports, the
picture seems to meld as one. Once the evidence has been
presented, the reader is led to a conclusion that is at best
convincing and at least thought provoking. Are you willing to
risk having your worldview shaken? Read the preface free at:
http://hometown.aol.com/fi4mufon/myhomepage/index.html To order
your copy of THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION, go to:
http://www.buybooksontheweb.com Or Save the shipping charges
and order your autographed copy by sending a check or money
order for $13.95 (US) per copy to: David Twichell, P.O. Box
511, Trenton MI. 48183-0511

PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO photographs
available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy
Commander Graham Bethune. $10.00. Send check or money order to
G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055. CD OF
FILER'S FILES for the last four years 1997 through 2000 is
available for $25.00. Both for $30.00.

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
were caught on recent Shuttle video footage. Jeffhas over an
hour-long tape of UFOs shot in space. Jeff spends hundreds of
hours watching the shuttlebroadcasts from space and is now an
expert on NASA missions and even those onboard the shuttle are
unlikelyto see what Jeff does. Using Jeff's directions you will
be able to learn the difference between space junk, icecrystals
and real UFOs. One segment has 24 UFOs watching the shuttle
from space. I feel confident we could gointo a court of law and
convince any jury, UFOs are moving around our Earth. Send $25
to: Jeff Challender 2768Mendel Way - Sacramento, California
95833-2011.

MUFON UFO JOURNALFor more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $30 per
yearby contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted2001 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the
files on their Web Sites providedthey credit the newsletter and
its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. Caution:Most of these are initial reports and require
further investigation. These reports and comments are
notnecessarily the official MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters
to Majorstar@Aol.com. Sending mail automaticallygrants
permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if
you wish to keep your name, address, orstory confidential.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Kelly

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:08:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:32:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Kelly


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:27:22 -0500

 >Jerry, List

 >I only got in a fight once as a teenager, and in the end it
 >turned out to be as much Farce as Fight.

Oh my! I was just about asleep. Sometimes I put myself to sleep
reading emails - like when a mommy reads a goodnight story.
Right? Right!

 >One night a car full of juniors pulled up alongside the car of
 >seniors I was in, and the usual obscene gestures were exchanged.
 >We pulled into a parking lot to sort things out. When the junior
 >I'd gestured to got out, he looked, um, rather larger than he
 >had sitting down. So I hit the guy next to him instead. We
 >rolled around on the ground for awhile, with everyone else
 >standing around us, then got up, kissed, and made up. Hey, we
 >were in the same school and played on the same team, after all.

Now, I have to say this: That story sucks. Sorry. Dennis, you
obviously do not know what it is like to live in a youth culture
where fighting is a serious business. I'm a woman - but oh my
goodness, I don't think I have ever seen a fake fight before.

 >Recently, I made some rude comments about some people on this
 >thread, not because they were the real targets of my anger, but
 >because they were... available.

You're apologising for not being able to really fight and then
picking on people? Shame on you.

 >So, who was I picking a fight with, and why was I picking a
 >fight in the first place?

I dunno.

 >I'm afraid my disgust meter with what passes for much of ufology
 >in this country finally boiled over. There was no final straw.
 >What's the use of singling out individual strands, anyway, when
 >you're basically dealing with a big bale of hay?

Oh well! You couldn't beat a straw. What type of man are you?
But I'll give you a hint - if you can't beat a single straw then
just pour gas on the whole bale and watch from the distance.

 >Maybe it was more MJ-12 document mumbo-jumbo from the Woods duo,
 >more sheer Greer lunacy in Washington, or yet another Roswell
 >artifact a la Leir. Whatever, it was (or is) The Week That Was
 >for Ufology, the week that the inmates launched their most
 >serious assault on the asylum yet. This has always been a
 >potential, recurring threat, of course, but there's a big
 >difference this time: the inmates are now better funded than the
 >Old Guard administrators are.

Hehe. Great! Don't you think? No - I guess you don't. It upsets
you! That people have money! Who? I'm a nice person and a pretty
good writer and maybe the inmates will fund me to - well, take
the whip to this unruly and insane group. I would truly do that.

 >You could say American ufology is at a crossroads.

Oh well. I'm Canadian. Please disregard the above.

 >It's no longer a question of whether the UFO glass is half-full
 >or half-empty. It's a question of how much arsenic (or sewage)
 >is in the water in the first place.

Oh Dennis - cheer up! I loved a guy named Dennis once, but he
left me when I got the measles and he went on a trip to Quebec
and met a French woman and I have never forgiven any man named
Dennis ever after that totally ridiculous and outlandish and
horrible rejection of me. So Dennis, don't be miserable about
the State of UFOs. Holy Cow, if you forgot about hitting kids
younger than you and dumping beautiful women, maybe you could
have a nice glass of wine instead of a murky glass of water?

 >Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking.

 >My apologies to my secondary targets: I was aiming at someone
 >else.

Okay! Glad to hear you're feeling better! The sun will be
shining in the morning. So don't give up hope.


Kelly








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 8

               Budd Hopkins' IF Seminar Announcement - 5/19/01

From: Intruders Foundation <IFConfer@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 00:19:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:53:09 -0400
Subject: Budd Hopkins' IF Seminar Announcement - 5/19/01



Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Announcement

PANEL OF PROFESSIONAL THERAPISTS
DISCUSS THE UFO ABDUCTION PHENOMENON

Saturday, May 19, 2001

Ever wonder what conclusions clinically trained therapists reach
in working with people who claim to have had alien abduction
experiences? Want to know more about their opinions and research
findings?

As part of its ongoing educational seminar series, the Intruders
Foundation (IF) will offer a panel discussion by three
professionals in the field of mental health. They are:

* Ted Davis, M.A., M.S.W. and a member of the IF Advisory
Committee. Ted will present an illuminating history of various
psychological studies of people reporting UFO abductions and
their often surprising results.

* Gerald Sunnen, M.D., a psychiatrist with long experience
working with UFO abductees. Dr. Sunnen will discuss his own
clinical practice and will offer insights into helpful
therapeutic methods, as well as common abductee coping
strategies.

* Jed Turnbull, M.S.W. and Ph.D. candidate, another member of
the IF Advisory Committee, will describe his successful use of
the anxiety-reducing therapy known by the initials EMDR, and
will also discuss his experience as a practitioner of regressive
hypnosis.

* Budd Hopkins, IF's Executive Director and a veteran abduction
investigator will moderate the panel discussion. He will add
remarks about his experience with hypnosis, and he will address
some of opinions and recent experimental findings concerning its
usefulness and reliability.

This, our last seminar until we resume in September, promises to
be an important program. We invite you to come and bring your
questions. As always, the seminar will be opened up to full
audience participation. This is your chance to learn about UFO
abductions from experienced, professional clinicians.


REGISTRATION & INFORMATION

The seminar will be held on May 19th at the meeting rooms of
A.R.E., on the tenth floor of 150 W. 28th Street, New York, NY.
The price of the seminar is $30 for non-members and $20 for
members of IF, seniors, and students. Reservations must be made
by telephone at 212-645-5278, and will be filled on a first
come, first served basis. Payment must be made in advance to
secure the reservation. Make checks payable to the Intruders
Foundation, P.O. Box 30233, New York, NY 10011. Only 50
reservations will be accepted.

On-street parking is generally available in the neighborhood.
The seminar will begin at 7:30 PM and end at 10:00 PM. Doors
open at 7:00 PM. There will be a one half-hour intermission,
during which light complimentary refreshments will be served. A
book table will offer books, videotapes, and other material for
sale to those interested. For additional information, call IF at
212-645-5278.

Hope to see you there!

----------

The Intruders Foundation Seminar Series is presented in the
interests of open-minded scientific learning and the free
exchange of research, ideas, and theories. IF makes no specific
claims or endorsements regarding any materials, views, or
subject matter presented by our guests.

----------

Want to know more about Budd Hopkins and his nonprofit
scientific research organization, as well as past and future IF
events? Please visit our Intruders Foundation Website:

www.intrudersfoundation.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 9

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:25:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:15:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Gates


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began
 >when Portage County Deputy Sheriffs Spaur and Neff were out of
 >their cruiser investigating an abandoned automobile in early
 >morning. A large glowing structured (disc-like) object rose up
 >out of the woods, moved toward them and stopped overhead,
 >brightly illuminating them and the local environment. It was
 >making a humming sound.


<snip>

 >Local police called their dispatcher and Air Force interceptors
 >were scrambled to investigate. The UFO could be seen in the
 >distance hovering and now appearing as a bright point of light.
 >As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >"straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >Bob says Venus. Jury?

Hi Dick,

To a skeptical mind if a witness described a "glowing, disk
shaped UFO that had the brightness of a meteor.." it translates
out to "blah blah blah blah blah blah meteor blah blah.
Naturally the skeptical mind would instantly label the case as a
meteor.

In this particular case we ignore everything except for "bright
point of light" and naturally Venus comes to mind.

Pretty simple being a skeptic isn't it..... :)


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 9

                  Re: S.I.B. Announces Project COTA - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 22:25:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:17:05 -0400
Subject: Re: S.I.B. Announces Project COTA - Hatch


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 06:53:43 -0400
 >Subject: S.I.B. Announces Project COTA

 >Project C.O.T.A. Catalog of Anomalous Tronco-Conical Objects

 >An Open Letter Addressed to the International UFO Community

 >Dear Friends:

 >The Sociedad de Investigaciones Biofsicas has embarked upon a
 >cataloging project fora ll UFO incidents involving conical,
 >tronco-conical or pyramidal objects. The goal ist to establish a
 >database that is as thorough as possible for this type of unique
 >object as an initial step in determining behavior and shape
 >patterns. To do this, it is necessary to secure the cooperation
 >of the greatest number of UFO organizations around the planet.

 >I am therefore humbly requesting that you scan your files in
 >seach of this type of case. Should you find any case you have
 >researched yourself, or for which you have adequate references,
 >please contact me at my personal address:
 >unicornio@supercable.es


Hello Scott:

Please send my email address <larryhat@jps.net>to the people in
charge of this project in Spain. I have a file prepared which
may interest them.


Best!

- Larry Hatch










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 9

                  Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:27:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 23:59:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Gates


 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...

 >UpDaters may be amused by the following item, unearthed when I
 >was browsing through the slowly fossilising layers of
 >prehistoric magazines at Magonia Towers:

 >From Flying Saucer Review, volume one, number four,
 >September-October 1955.

 >"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
 >of UFO reports.

 >"In Los Angeles there were dozens of reports of three silvery
 >disc-shaped objects that 'changed formation as if playing tag
 >in the sky', and appeared to be 'leaping over each other'. A
 >squadron of jets went up to search for the objects, but returned
 >unsuccessful.

 >"It was suggested at first that they were weather baloons, but
 >the Weather Bureau reported that no balloons were aloft. Then
 >came the final explanation - the objects were inland pelicans!"

 >Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
 >wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.


Sounds like a good forward to somebodys book called Pelicanism
and ufology, or why Pelicans and Lighthouses explain all UFO
reports..... :)

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:55:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 00:06:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 10:48:56 -0700

 >Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
 >By Ed Gehrman

 >Blunders do not make a hoaxer or a liar. Col. Corso would have
 >to be both if he didn't seed alien technology into US business,
 >as he says he did. The Day After Roswell is about that fact and
 >is not intended as a history of the cold war and shouldn't be
 >read in that way. It comes down to whether you believe he was
 >trying to tell the truth, not whether he produced a mistake-free
 >document.

Ed,

He never admitted to making any mistakes. He merely maintained
(last I knew) that Birnes stroked and joked the book. Birnes
claims the book is accurate.

The question comes down to what exactly was 'Birnes-ized' in the
book? In essence the book you rely upon as truthful and accurate
has been discredited to a degree by the supposed lead author,
claiming that his co-author stroked the truth. So what is truth
and what is stroked is not known.

Speaking of Corso whatever happened to the so called
Corsofiles.com where we were going to get the straight
information directly from Corso's files? It died and hasn't been
resurrected. Personally I was breathless waiting for the full
story about how the Nazi's developed a time machine at the end
of WW II. You may recall that is what he said at the very end of
his Dateline interview.

<snip>

 >He may have make numerous mistakes, but his testimony concerning
 >the seeding of alien technology is a lie or it's the truth. It
 >is certainly not a "mistake". Was he telling the truth about
 >that or wasn't he? If he wasn't, then he's a liar and a fake.
 >It's that issue that we all need to wrestle with. It's not
 >enough to insist that he made some mistakes, therefore he
 >shouldn't be believed. The mistakes have become red herrings
 >pulled across our path to distract us from the important
 >information Col.Corso has bravely given us.

Lets not forget who allowed the mistakes to happen and pretty
well up to his death did absolutly nothing about, never called a
press conference to correct the book so on and so forth.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 04:29:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 00:11:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Velez


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 08:49:27 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:23:00 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >>>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

 ><snip>

 >I agree Steve. It would be nice to think that this is going to
 >>make a difference. Somehow I doubt it. Why the Hell should the
 >>gubbamint suddenly do a 180 on a policy that it has so staunchly
 >>maintained for half a century or more? Because Greer serves them
 >>watercress sandwiches at a VIP luncheon? I don't think so.

 >Maybe with thin slices of good cheese.  -LH

I swear to Ghot Larry, I hope they actually accomplish something
over the next few days. I would purely love to see open hearings
on the subject by our elected officials, and pressure applied by
large enough numbers of of people for them to induce 'Uncle' to
tell us the truth. (by popular demand.) I'd just feel a whole
lot better about it if it was somebody like Dick Hall or Stan
Friedman or any number of other equally competent people down
there coordinating and presenting this thing. It's Greer that I
have a problem with. Not the 'concept' of the disclosure project
itself. Like I said, I wish them all the luck in the world. I
just don't hold out any great expectations.

Greer is slicker than snot. He "took" the ball while we all sat
back and 'enabled' it with our own apathy. Now let's see how he
runs it down court toward the hoop. I'm curious to find out if
this white man can 'jump' after all the trash talk. <LOL>

Here's a 'Fractured Fairy Tale' (and life lesson) gleaned from a
misspent youth.   ;)

In regard to con men:

I grew up just blocks away from the George Washington Bridge bus
terminal in Manhattan. Every con man, pick pocket, pimp, junkie,
and hustler in the neighborhood used to 'work' the terminal.
They used to refer to it as "roping mopes." As if they were
urban cowboys talking about rustling the 'slow' cows in the
herd. They each had clearly defined 'spots' (territories) that
"belonged" to them inside the spacious three story terminal. The
'spots' were treated as if they were lucrative hot dog
concessions! When one guy would get busted there was always
another con artist waiting in the wings to take his place. It's
all about money, power, (over others) and control (over others)
for people like that. Their 'prey' is the naive and the
gullible.

Just like them, Greer acts like his poo-doo doesn't stink and
that nobody can see through him. He's sadly wrong on both
counts. This guy is as transparent as brand new Andersson glass.
Over the last few years I watched as; he created an
international furor because he ripped off a UFO videotape from
some Scottish researchers... I saw him called to task for
ripping off the work of other ufologists and calling it his
own... as he declared himself the "representative of the UFO
community" before our elected reps in Washington... as he
slandered and trashed the names of some _good_ people. (My
friend and ufologist John Stepkowski being one of them.) Just
about everything Greer does involves some kind of rip-off or
manipulative behavior. I'm sorry, I just don't trust him as far
as I can throw him. He hasn't earned any trust either through
his actions or his behavior. I am _stunned_ that he has any
supporters at all. If we don't do anything about the "Greer's"
when they come along, we will be doomed to repeated visitations
from others like him. Just like the bus terminal, someone else
will come along and take over his 'spot.'  ;)

Wake up people! The hour is getting late. Like frogs in slowly
heating water, you are being cooked and prepared to be eaten
alive by human predators with agendas of their own. And 'most of
you' don't even know it or seem to care.  ;)

"Don't follow leaders and watch yer parking meters!"  (Bob
Dylan)

Regards,
John Velez, speaking strictly for myself

                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                          Space Defense Initiative

From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 08:03:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:00:46 -0400
Subject: Space Defense Initiative


Regardless of one's opinion of Steven Greer, it is interesting
to note the coincidence in timing of the following announcement
and the CSETI disclosure conference slated for tomorrow.

In a story released today, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
has plans to create a U.S. space force.  In a news conference to
be held later today, the Pentagon will announce "major changes
to improve the leadership, management and organization of the
nation's defense and intelligence space program."

Many more juicy details can be found in the following URL:

http://partners.nytimes.com/2001/05/08/world/08SPAC.html?Partner=AOL&RefId=l3eEF
nnunJn2

Apparently, broader responsibilities including additional
authority in the areas of acquisition, research and development
will be assigned to the Air Force Space Command, currently based
at Colorado Springs, Colo., and to put a four-star general in
charge.

According to the news story, Rumsfeld believes more emphasis
should be placed on strengthening the military's efforts in
space including the role of satellites in the missile defense
system and protecting U.S. satellites against attack. Further
comments included that a lack of attention by the government to
its satellites and space policy makes "an attractive candidate
for a space Pearl Harbor."

Justification given for this move is that the United States
depends on space for surveillance, military operations, weather
forecasts, and cell phone connections while government agencies
fail to make space protection a top priority. It was also noted
that military conflicts in space are inevitable. "We know from
history that every medium - air, land and sea - has seen
conflict. Reality indicates that space will be no different.
Given this virtual certainty, the United States must develop the
means both to deter and to defend against hostile acts in and
from space."









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

              Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Strickland

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:37:36 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:02:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Strickland


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 20:30:26 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600

Ron, EBK, Listers,

Ron stated:

 >I'm not trying to turn this into a debate between the New Age
 >and mainstream ("fire and brimstone") Christian interpretations,
 >etc.

You ask pertinent questions, Ron. You say you don't want to
debate. If you don't want to respond to my remarks, that's your
perogative. Maybe someone else will feel the need to express
themselves. I'm entitled to respond to your questions.

 >If you believe all that Judeo-Christian stuff, then how come you
 >don't believe the ET's are 'innately evil', as you say later on?

"If I believe..." is the crux, isn't it? I believe what I've
experienced, which correlates nicely with what is presented in
the New Testament. Why should I believe in "original sin"? I
don't. That's an aberation of the Old Testament story of
creation, as told in the book of Genesis, to _try_ to explain
man's _weakness_ for that which is evil. The intent of the
story, as I understand it, was to explain our weakness for evil
as "taught," not inherent. Therefore, "we" are not "born in
sin," but learn how to sin. It is only because we have learned
this lesson so well over eons of time, that our proclevity for
sin only _appears_ to be innate. The fact that several Christian
faiths are of the opinion that man is "born in sin," and use
that very story to authenticate their belief, fails to correlate
with what is actually presented in the book of Genesis. What's
in the Bible strongly correlates with my belief in everlasting
life. That's not strictly a Christian concept, is it? The ETs
didn't change my faith. They strengthened it.

 >I've just been curious for a while now how a person can claim to
 >be a Bible-believing Christian, which includes all that Prophecy
 >stuff, and still believe that alleged ET's are purely natural,
 >intelligent beings from another planet that somehow made their
 >way over here - all of which directly implies, to me, that the
 >J-C God is allowing ET to potentially muck with his End Times
 >plans for Humanity.

 >How do you reconcile these views?

I think reconciling the views is what we _all_ want to do. How I
do that is to look up at the billions of stars and planets on a
dark, clear night. My little planet is like a piece of sand on a
huge beach. And, I'm like a tiny bacteria on that grain of sand.
If God made the whole dang beach, I think He could make more
than 1 kind of bacteria (me) to inhabit more than 1 grain of
sand. And, that doesn't count all the other beaches (universes)
beyond our own. I'm not so egotistical as to think I'm the
_only_ bacteria God created. Are you?

The Old Testament presents God as an angry, vengeful,
unforgiving Creator. The New Testament presents God as loving,
kind, all-forgiving. I think maybe there's some gray area in
there, don't you? (Pun intended). If God, whatever one choses to
follow and whatever you chose to call Him, can allow centuries
of misery to rain down on humans, without intervening directly
(i.e., the Holocaust as 1 of millions of examples), what makes
you think He's not using "us" (human beings) and "others" (ETs)
to balance the scales in this little corner of His Universe?
Maybe the ETs are "worker-bee-type angels." Maybe we're ETs
ancestors. Frankly, I don't know. I would like to know as much
as you (would like to know).

 >>But, they do believe in an Almighty Creator of the Universe
 >>(not them and not us), and quote; "We value life, all life."

That's what they told me. Because of the _way_ it was said, I
believe them. We also say the same thing about ourselves. Of
course, we've done nothing to prove the positive aspect of that
concept. In fact, our behavior has managed prove the hypothesis
null. We have blown up 2 cities, frying everything in the path
of the atom bombs, polluted our little planet, and now we are
trying to find ways to shoot missiles into space (presumably to
protect ourselves from ourselves). The ETs have lied to me
before, but my feeling at the time was that they were telling me
what they believe. It is not to say that they are not capable of
evil. They are. So are we (obviously). If they were "perfect,"
they would be gods. They don't pretend to be "perfect." We are
the _only_ ones deluding ourselves about our perfection, it
seems.

 >Tell that to all those poor cows...
 >With all the "lips and <buttocks>" they've been carving out
 >of/off of our Moo-Moo's, me-thinks ET has a hankering for Slim
 >Jims...

We eat them (cows). We say prayers over the cows we eat (after
they're dead)! Tell me that doesn't sound a bit strange! It's
almost as weird as eating candy out of our socks at Christmas
time, or hiding colored chicken eggs and telling our children
that a rabbit brought them! We don't know _what_ theyr're doing
with those cow parts. Maybe they're growing some synthetic
protein from the cow's brain cells to use as "food" for bacteria
to use later in the manufacture of antibiotics and vaccines.
Opps, I got confused! That's what "we" are currently doing with
cow's brain cells. We have "advanced" to the sex organs yet.

Let's face it. They are _way_ ahead of us technologically, and
yet "we" keep coming up with these miracle medical cures. Ever
wonder where those "ideas" came from? I wonder too. Especially
since I was burned accidentally with an ET laser beam long
before "we" invented the laser. At that time, we were still
blowing up rockets on the launch pad at Cape Canaveral.

That does not mean that I think the ETs are psychologically or
emotionally mature. Nope. I don't. They have proven to me to be
rather immature, in fact. Maybe that comes with isolation in
space travel (time travel backwards). Who knows? I once had an
aunt who said that if the face creams she had been lathering on
for years would work as they were advertised to do, she should
be 10 or 12 years old by now.

Anyway, I don't have answers for anyone else. I've come to grips
with this myself pretty well after 30+ years...until the next
unexpected visit. It never fails to freak me out a bit. It is
truly wierd. Then I have to regroup all over, and give myself
this last little lecture I just gave you.


Sue











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

               Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Sadowski

From: Scott Sadowski <scotty_s@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 09:13:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:04:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Sadowski


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 20:30:26 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "Fallen Angels"
 >>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600

 >I'm not trying to turn this into a debate between the New Age
 >and mainstream ("fire and brimstone") Christian interpretations,
 >etc.

 >I've just been curious for a while now how a person can claim to
 >be a Bible-believing Christian, which includes all that Prophecy
 >stuff, and still believe that alleged ET's are purely natural,
 >intelligent beings from another planet that somehow made their
 >way over here - all of which directly implies, to me, that the
 >J-C God is allowing ET to potentially muck with his End Times
 >plans for Humanity.

 >How do you reconcile these views?

How is there any difference between the more intelligent E.T.s
"mucking" about with us and "His End Times plans for Humanity"
and our more intelligent missionaries "mucking" about with the
less civilized peoples of the Central and South Americas and
Africa and "His End Times plans for their Humanity"? Is it just
because we are all terrestrial? To God, I would imagine that the
universe is all terrestrial and the E.T.s are just missionaries
enlightening us as we are "supposedly" enlightening the
"Heathens" in the underdeveloped countries.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:16:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:06:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 17:16:44 -0300

 >>Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >>pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >>FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >>missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.

See my reply to Greg.

 >There are other serious problems with Lieutenant Colonel Corso's
 >claims, such as his falsely claiming in a sworn statement to
 >attorney Peter Gersten that he had been a member of the National
 >Security Council.

I have not seen that statement. I believe he wrote that he was
Ike's military advisor to the NSC. In the introduction,  Strom
Thurmond wrote: "Corso had also spent four years working at the
NSC". The facts may be a little confusing but as you point out,
Col. Corso did not have the opportunity to correct the obvious
flaws he found. I also know that John Alexander checked out Col.
Corso's credentials and found them AOK.

 >A Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded not long ago for work done
 >in 1958, that Corso claimed he had provided to industry in 1961
 >from alien technology.

Have you read 'The Day After Roswell'? Which transfer of
technology are you refering to here?

 >His own son in a public forum (which he wouldn't allow to be
 >taped) in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, (Journey's Beyond
 >Conference) last fall, claimed that only 10% of the book was
 >worthwhile because Corso had not been able to review it.

That's correct. Col. Corso was not able to review the book but I
think his son's statement is a bit of an exaggeration. Col.
Corso stated many times that the main thesis of his book was
absolutely true: he seeded alien technology to the US business
community.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                         Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 10:39:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:08:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:33:27 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser

Previously, I had written:

 >>I requested an invitation for myself and the Chairman of the
 >>Fund for UFO Research, but we were told that the briefing on
 >>Wednesday was only for current members of the working press, and
 >>that request was denied. I was advised that if I could get a
 >>Member of Congress to attend the VIP Luncheon (I just happen to
 >>work at the U.S. House), I could tag along. No cost was
 >>mentioned, and I've seen nothing to indicate that tickets are
 >>being sold to anyone. I would add that it is unlikely that the
 >>press will be encouraged to give much publicity to the VIP
 >>event, as there may be some desire to let attendees remain
 >>anonymous. In the political environment of DC that would be
 >>normal procedure, and the press would do its part to try and
 >>find out what happened and who was there.

To which, Larry responded:

 >Do I perceive an unwelcome mat for the more serious UFO groups
 >and individuals... i.e. those who might view these matters with
 >some degree of healthy skepticism?

This isn't the reason given, and I'll have to take their
statements on face value. However, I made the request
understanding that Greer and the FUND have had their own ethical
and legal difficulties in the past, so the the rejection wasn't
a complete surprise.

Several years ago Dr. Greer brought a group to Washington and
held a series of closed briefings that were ostensibly for
Members of Congress and other high level Government officials.
Since I work at the U.S. House, and had been in routine contact
with (the late) Congressman Steven Schiff's staff, I was
interested in finding out who had actually attended these
meetings. I was also somewhat surprised that such a major series
of meetings were being held in a complete publicity vacuum.

In the end, the only description of how those sessions went came
from Dr. Greer's group. I was able to locate only one person
from the U.S. House who had actually attended any of the
meetings. This person was a staffer who had gone to the meeting
on her own time, and she emphasized to me that she was not
representing the office. She may not have been the only person
to attend from the U.S. House, but somehow this didn't seem to
jive with the success story being touted elsewhere.

I had written:

 >>From what I can see on the local front, this is a non-event as
 >>far as the public is concerned. There has been no publicity
 >>about it, except for the mentions we've seen on the Internet. If
 >>there's any hope of getting the public to the event on Saturday,
 >>then it will have to come from the massive publicity expected to
 >>result from the "disclosures" on Wednesday. Unfortunately, the
 >>press in DC isn't very sympathetic to the subject of UFOs, and
 >>getting good publicity is going to be tough.

To which, Larry commented:

 >Well, the Art Bell show performance should have provided plenty
 >of publicity. The Bell audience seems highly receptive to
 >extraordinary claims, they might ultimately be a major source of
 >funding as well.

As I understand it, a marketting expert has been retained to
promote the Disclosure Briefing events, and the primary focus
was to get members of the Press to the Briefing on Wednesday. I
believe these were going to be personal invitations, so they
would have a good idea of who and how many to expect. This
session is reportedly for current members of the Press, and a
few VIPs. With the growth of cable news channels, I suspect that
one or two television cameras will be in attendance to document
the event and if it's a slow news day we may see bits and pieces
of the event appearing on cable news channels for about 24 hours
after the Briefing. But if there isn't a "smoking gun" to latch
onto, most reports will probably be about the personalities in
the genre rather than focus on the subject matter.

The Art Bell exposure may result in a few people driving to
Washington for the Saturday briefing, but this region has a
group of about 75 to 100 people who show up at local events and
it's been difficult to attract a larger audiance than that. I'm
not convinced that a large number of people will drive to DC for
this event, but I could be wrong.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 18:45:53 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:26:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:38:50 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 21:16:05 +0100

 >>I have no emotional investment in that at all because
 >>I haven't got a clue - I'm simply interested in _why_
 >>people believe they exist, and the lengths they will
 >>go to pursuade and in some cases, browbeat, others
 >>into adopting their questionable conclusions.

 >Would you say you took the same stance in one of your last
 >writings for the Sheffield Star, prior to your sudden departure
 >after Max Burns was sentenced?

Hi Roy,

As you all know I wasn't really working for the Sheffield Star
at all, but doing my master's bidding.

When MFI offered me a better job, I thought I'd take it.

That's what you wanted to hear wasn't it?

As for my stance - that hasn't changed at all.

Dave C









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:10:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:32:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:14:06 -0700

 >>In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
 >>administration do something about the presence of Soviet
 >>missiles in Cuba.

 >Yes, he does say that: pgs. 253-257. But this is a very
 >complicated story.

 >There is no reason that I can see that this bit of information
 >would harm Col. Corso's reliability. Do you have the book at
 >your side? What is your take on this section of the book?

I have the book. I bought it when it came out, and I've read it
carefully. (See past posts in the UpDates archive.)

What Corso said about the Cuban Missile Crisis in the book was -
I'm sorry - nonsense. I was interested in checking what Corso
said, when the book came out. By coincidence, the book (edited
by Harvard historian Ernest May, with whom I took a course when
I was in college) of transcripts of White House discussions
during the Cuban Missile Crisis had just been published. I
compared the two.

And then, of course, there are many other sources. The Cuban
Missile Crisis hasn't exactly been ignored by historians.
There's a large literature, which now includes material from
Soviet sources and once-secret Soviet archives, to parallel the
once-secret American information now available.

Ed, maybe I should ask you what you've read of all this history.
You're happy to offer your opinion on Corso's role during the
Cold War. How much do you actually know  about Cold War history?
Or are you just sort of making it up as you go along?

It's easy to look at something you don't know about, and say,
"Well, look, I can see some ways in which Corso might be right."

It's harder to do that if you know - in some detail - what
others have written about the same history.


Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

               Cydonian Imperative: 05-08-01 Anomalous "Ring"

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 14:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:35:14 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 05-08-01 Anomalous "Ring"


The Cydonian Imperative
5-8-01

Elliptical Formation Near Eras Mounds and "Dome" in Cydonia

by Mac Tonnies

see: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html



[image]


Curious ring composed of small isolated mounds. The placement of
the mounds appears nonrandom.

The region in Cydonia featuring the morphologically unique Eras
Mounds and apparent dome is also home to a curious, distinct
elliptical formation composed of evenly spaced small mounds. The
most resonable skeptical argument against nonrandom placement is
that "Cydoniahenge" (as I dub this formation) is the remains of
a badly eroded meteor impact. However, telltale signs of crater
damage such as caldera and ejecta are tantalizingly absent. And
Cydoniahenge's close proximity to the anomalies discussed above
give one pause.

Could the complex around the Eras Mounds constitute some sort of
"earthworks" or cultural center? Or are we seeing yet more
bizarre rocks behaving in decidedly ungeological ways?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                   Re: Just Clark/e-ing Around - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 19:26:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:59:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Just Clark/e-ing Around - Maccabee


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 18:59:11 EDT
 >Subject: Just Clark/e-ing Around [was: Debunkers' Guidebook]
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:07:27 -0500

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:17:54 +0100

 >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:05:12 -0500


 >OK, OK... listen up... is there any way we can reduce the number
 >of Clark/e'ses here? It's getting _very_ confusing.

 >I have a solution.....
 >
 >Please, identify yourselves as 'Pro-Clark', 'Anti-Clark' and
 >Definitely Clark. OK?


We need another Clark so we can have "Three Clarks for Muster
Mark."

(Physics joke)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                 Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 19:26:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:11:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Nothing New Under The Sun... - Maccabee


 >Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:09:15 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Nothing New Under The Sun...


 >UpDaters may be amused by the following item, unearthed when I
 >was browsing through the slowly fossilising layers of
 >prehistoric magazines at Magonia Towers:

 >From Flying Saucer Review, volume one, number four,
 >September-October 1955.

 >"CRIFO tells a story of the latest American official explanation
 >of UFO reports.

 >"In Los Angeles there were dozens of reports of three silvery
 >disc-shaped objects that 'changed formation as if playing tag
in the sky', and appeared to be 'leaping over each other'. A
 >squadron of jets went up to search for the objects, but returned
 >unsuccessful.>

 >"It was suggested at first that they were weather baloons, but
 >the Weather Bureau reported that no balloons were aloft. Then
 >came the final explanation - the objects were inland pelicans!">

 >Naturally, as this was an 'official' explanation, it must be
 >wrong, part of the cover-up, totally ridiculous, etc., etc.

I a case like this one must be suspicious of the sighting and
also of the explanation. However, this ends up being an
Insufficient INformation case because there is neither enough
information to prove or to disprove that the objects could have
been pelicans.

It would be interesting to find out how the pelican conclusion
was arrived at,. Perhaps if the exact date is known the
newspaper survey Project '47 is carrying out might uncover the
original newspaper reports.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                    Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 20:10:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:14:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:27:22 -0500


<snip>

 >I'm afraid my disgust meter with what passes for much of ufology
 >in this country finally boiled over. There was no final straw.
 >What's the use of singling out individual strands, anyway, when
 >you're basically dealing with a big bale of hay?

 >Maybe it was more MJ-12 document mumbo-jumbo from the Woods duo,
 >more sheer Greer lunacy in Washington, or yet another Roswell
 >artifact a la Leir. Whatever, it was (or is) The Week That Was
 >for Ufology, the week that the inmates launched their most
 >serious assault on the asylum yet. This has always been a
 >potential, recurring threat, of course, but there's a big
 >difference this time: the inmates are now better funded than the
 >Old Guard administrators are.

 >You could say American ufology is at a crossroads.

 >It's no longer a question of whether the UFO glass is half-full
 >or half-empty. It's a question of how much arsenic (or sewage)
 >is in the water in the first place.

 >Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking.

 >My apologies to my secondary targets: I was aiming at someone
 >else.

<snip>

Yo Dennis, List.

This "Debunkers' Guidebook" series may well be the best of all
time on this List.

I believe Hall, Clark & al. have the silly scoffers and the
would-be debunkers and the spurious skeptics by the balls.

As, for once, there is some heavy talk about precise elements of
precise cases.

It's a thrill to have my daily dose of emails from UpDates.

Before you hang yourself with a G flat piano chord, it would be
_really_ nice of you to take part in this debate and, _finally_,
try your best to address the questions asked by the real
debunkers and the real skeptics.

If I didn't know better, I'd bet you can't take the heat and
you are looking for a hole to hide in.

As a matter of fact, your whole post sounds, pardon the
expression, like the whining of an impotent about pornography:
"I can't have sex! Look! Porn is so bad!"

Your "Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking"
did send shivers along my spine.

Will this be your last excuse to avoid the debate?


Serge







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                        Re: Ravenna 1966 - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 22:21:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:20:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Mortellaro



 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:16:16 -0500


 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus.

 ><snip>

 >>Local police called their dispatcher and Air Force interceptors
 >>were scrambled to investigate. The UFO could be seen in the
 >>distance hovering and now appearing as a bright point of light.
 >>As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >>jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >>"straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >I think Bob's _idea_ could be Venus; it's just not as bright. <g>.

Dear Young Bob, Alfred, Dick, EBK and bListers lurking,

Dammit people! Just what the heck is the matter with you? Of
course it was Venus. Damned foolish to think ANYTHING else.

"Why?" you aks? Haven't you heard all the stories about Venus
rising, fooling everyone from engineers, inebriants and pilots
even - into thinking it's a UFO. This has happened so often that
if you think something is bright in the sky, it just GOTTA be
Venus.

Anyone thinking udder wise is a dingleberry.

Thank you,

Jim (Dingleberry) Mortellaro
PhD's too numerous to mention
And every one purchased from 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                        Re: Ravenna 1966 - Deschamps

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 00:27:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:27:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Deschamps


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 16:40:54 -0300
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began
 >>when Portage County Deputy Sheriffs Spaur and Neff were out of
 >>their cruiser investigating an abandoned automobile in early
 >>morning. A large glowing structured (disc-like) object rose up
 >>out of the woods, moved toward them and stopped overhead,
 >>brightly illuminating them and the local environment. It was
 >>making a humming sound.

 ><snip>

 >>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >Hi Dick,

 >Bob always sez Venus or a meteor. He once had a job in a record
 >factory and he's stuck in a groove.

 >I'm just needling him.


Dick and List,

This is what I meant when I once said how funny it was that some
people seem to want to rehash old classic unknown cases in the
hopes of labeling a mundane explanation to them, despite the
fact that these unknowns were fully investigated by competent
researchers.

These people don't want to face up to the truth, at all cost!

Too dams bad!  Deal with it!... I say.


Michel M. Deschamps









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawwers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:00:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawwers


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:14:06 -0700

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:59:59 -0400

<snipped>

G'day Greg, Ed, Listers


 >>>Col. Corso's FBI Files, Revisited.
 >>>By Ed Gehrman

 >>In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
 >>administration do something about the presence of Soviet
 >>missiles in Cuba.

 >Yes, he does say that: pgs. 253-257. But this is a very
 >complicated story.

 >There is no reason that I can see that this bit of information
 >would harm Col. Corso's reliability. Do you have the book at
 >your side? What is your take on this section of the book?

 >>There's no basis whatsoever for this in the historical record.
 >>It's especially revealing to read the verbatim transcripts of
 >>White House discussions before, during, and after the Cuban
 >>Missle crisis. If Corso had blown the whistle, and forced JFK to
 >>act, don't you think his name would have come up rather
 >>prominently? Needless to say, it doesn't.

It was more the _way_ he did it Greg...very surreptitiously

 >Of course it wouldn't. He was a confidential source. He was
 >unknown to those outside of the power center. A modern example
 >is Richard Armitage(sp?), Secretary Powell's best friend. Have
 >you read Day After Roswell? Carefully?

It looks like there are three groups, "the Puppets", "the
Puppeteers" and "the Puppet Masters"... the latter we don't hear
anything about, and thats the way they like it I would guess

 >>Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >>pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >>FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >>missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.

I don't know about this Greg. The "Puppets" often don't know the
"Puppet Masters"

I think the "FBI trouble" is more like petty jelousies,
bickering and politicing (sp) exacerbated by DeLoach. If Corso
was such a "rat" he most certainly would have been found out and
wouldn't have been in any position of power.

 >Did stories appear in the Boston Globe and the Washington Post
 >re Cuba and missile bases? I don't know the answer; perhaps >
someone on the list can help. Is there anyone who has read 'The
 >Day After Roswell'? Why not chime in.

I have to agree Ed, it "_is_ a complicated story" Corsos hand
in the Cuban affair was rather indirect. It seemed Kennedy was
trying to ignore the missiles heading towards Cuba.

He was either getting bad intelligence or he didn't want any
confrontations, especially with Russia until after his first
term was up. If he was to wait till the second term he would
have been too late. The missiles would have been in place.

Corso was a patriot and couldn't stand by and let the US be made
a fool of so he contacted Paul Scott a political columnist of
some note and divulged "all" to him. This too me was a very
crafty way of forcing the Presidents hand by making the info
public whilst still remaining in the background as an
unknown...where all good intelligence ppl should be.

Scott, or others he told released the story to the public
forcing the President to confront the Russians. The rest is
history.

I would guess Corso didn't act on his own in all this, I'd bet
he discussed this with others and in his own way perhaps didn't
avert the impending war, but he certainly, got the admin. of
JFK to take some positive action.


William











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 16:58:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:06:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 09:32:33 -0500

 >>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 11:51:30 +0100

Hi Jerry,

I wrote:

 >>Take your 'UFO Encyclopedia' for instance - of all the hundreds
 >>of cases and reports detailed, _some_ of these must be hoaxes
 >>and misidentifications.

...and you replied:

 >For a guy who actually wrote and published a generous review of
 >that book, you seem strangely obtuse (or, more to the point,
 >disingenuous).

Perhaps I'm not the only one who should have pondered carefully
before typing as you appear to persistently misinterpret
everything I write. I stick by my generous review of your tome,
which I would happily recommend to my students as a textbook if
it wasn't so expensive.

However my point was not to criticise but to point out that the
case material it contains simply must contain a significant
percentage of hoaxes and misidentifications. I'm quite aware
that you devote space to the discussion of this category of
report, but that simply supports what I'm saying - that ufology
is as much a study of human imagination and perception as it is
of alleged 'ET visitation.'

 >>Surely it is in your own interests that ET does not land on the
 >>White House lawn, because if this should happen perhaps 99
 >>percent of the material in your book would be revealed as
 >>nothing but wishful thinking.

 >If this strange sentence has any meaning to anyone who
 >doesn't speak pelicanese, please let me know.


Squawk, squawk, squawk (see above). Does it make sense now?

Courtesy of the pelican,

Dr Dave








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                        Re: Secrecy News -- 02/09/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 14:13:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:36:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrecy News -- 02/09/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 9, 2001

**NEW FRUS VOLUME ON ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT
**CLASSIFIED INFO NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
**NEW BOOK ON SECURITY CLEARANCE POLICY


NEW FRUS VOLUME ON ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT

A new volume of the State Department's official Foreign
Relations of the United States (FRUS) series was released
yesterday, devoted to the Arab-Israeli conflict in the aftermath
of the Six Day War in 1967.

It traces the Johnson Administration's role in Middle East
diplomacy, notably including official U.S. efforts to discourage
the Israeli nuclear weapons program.

The new release does not encompass the 1967 war itself, which is
the subject of another volume to be published next year.
According to the FRUS editors, that long-awaited volume will
include documentation on the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty
on June 8, 1967.  The attack on the Liberty is the subject of a
disputed account by James Bamford in his new book Body of
Secrets.

The newly released FRUS volume is posted here:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xx/


CLASSIFIED INFO NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

The "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" that
government employees and contractors must sign before they are
granted access to classified information has been reissued in
slightly revised form and is now being circulated to government
agencies.

The Agreement, designated Standard Form (SF) 312, was updated
last year to include reference to 18 U.S.C. 1924 on
"Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or
Material" and to cite the current executive order on
classification.  The previous version of the Agreement,
published in 1991, is to be phased out by next month.

A copy of the new SF 312 is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf

An SF 312 briefing booklet prepared by the Information Security
Oversight Office is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/sf312.html


NEW BOOK ON SECURITY CLEARANCE POLICY

The Defense Personnel Security Research Center has published a
new book on "Security Clearances and the Protection of National
Security Information: Law and Procedures."

The book is authored by attorney Sheldon I. Cohen, who has
specialized for many years in the arcana of security clearance
law, regulation and policy.

It is hard not to learn something new from this 344 page volume.
For example: The CIA categorically refuses to disclose
transcripts or charts of its polygraph examinations under the
Privacy Act since the Agency believes that to do so "would
compromise its investigative methods."  Or:  "There is no [right
of] appeal ... of a denial or removal of access to a Special
Access Program."  And so forth.

In a lengthy series of appendices, Mr. Cohen provides a
selection of relevant agency documents, including a few items
that are not readily available elsewhere.

The book "is written for lawyers practicing in this area of the
law, for security officers and security managers of corporate
government contractors dealing with classified information, and
for government employees and contractor employees whose
livelihoods depend on obtaining or keeping a security
clearance."

The full text is available online in an extremely unwieldy 17 MB
PDF file through the Defense Technical Information Center.
Search under Accession Number ADA388100 here:

http://stinet.dtic.mil/str/tr4_fields.html

Alternatively, the softbound volume may be purchased for $49
plus $3 shipping from Sheldon I. Cohen and Associates, 2009 N.
Fourteenth Street, Suite 708, Arlington, Virginia 22201.

******************************
To subscribe to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org> with this comman
d in the body of the message:
subscribe secrecy_news [your email address]
To unsubscribe, send email to <majordomo@fas.org> with this command in the body
of the message:
unsubscribe secrecy_news [your email address]
Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email:  saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                  BBC - National Press Club UFO Conference

From: Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc <9a4ag@clarc.org>
Date: Wed,  9 May 2001 18:30:14 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:42:41 -0400
Subject: BBC - National Press Club UFO Conference


Dear List members,

International mainstream world wide station BBC WORLD SERVICE
has just released a report (about 22:50 CET time/20:50 GMT time
- May 9 2001.) about Disclosure project and National Press Club
Conference. Inside the supplement are some segments from the
Conference, statements from the VIP UFO wintesses (Michael Smith
and Clifford Stone - Smith talked about UFO radar detections and
Stone talked about crashed saucers and bodies found) and the
interview with Dr. Steven Greer. BBC has put a e-mail in the air
where BBC wants to hear the comments from the listeners about
the subject of UFO disclosure. Greer talked about UFO dislosure
implications from the cold ward as one of the reasons for UFO
controversy.

The e-mail is:

newshour@bbc.co.uk

So go for it guys :)

I will send the complete review about this supplement in a day
or a two. I have recorded a supplement and it is now in my
archive with the other previous BBC UFO news reports from the
past. I had a information before that BBC will be presented at
the conference. I also have previous experiance with BBC about
UFO reports and I from that perspective I thought that they will
do something about it again. In the past BBC has done great
suplements about Peter Sturrock's study on UFO's back in 1998
together with Edgar Mitchell's interview who said that he is
supporting pressures for Congressional hearings about UFO
subject. You may find my previous reports about those BBC
supplements in UFO UPDATES mailing list archive (somewhere in
1998). I will send a UPDATE leter. This is first BBC report
about National Press Club Conference (I know because I am
listening BBC all the time in the last week). So we may expect
more reports later so tune on the BBC and monitor other
mainstream stations how will they aproach to this subject.

NOTE: BBC WORLD WIDE SERVICE can be heard over short wave,
satelitte and Internet REAL AUDIO. For more information about
frequencies etc. use your search Web engine.


Yours:


<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Giuliano-Jimmy-Marinkovicc                                  |
|   Ante Starchevicca 25/c, 23000 Zadar, Croatia, Europe        |
|   telephone: +385-23-24-06-14                                 |
|   ICQ UIN #66584465                                           |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Analytical Group for Extra-Terrestrial Information => AGETI |
|   AGETI founder http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag                   |
|   To subscribe to AGETI mailing list send a blank e-mail to:  |
|   ageti-subscribe@yahooGroups.com                             |
|   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ageti                         |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Author, Writer and Director of                              |
|   TV documentary series "THE CROATIAN X-FILES"                |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Writer of UFO column in Croatian magazine AURA              |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>
|   Radio station DONAT-FM, 97,2 Mhz WFM                        |
|   Obala kneza Branimira 12, 23000 Zadar, Croatia, Europe      |
|   telephone: +385-23-236-380                                  |
|   Fax:       +385-23-236-365                                  |
|   Author/Host of the radio program "THE UFO-X-FILES"          |
|   Cooperator of the radio program "UFOPORT" (Radio Rijeka)    |
<===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===>










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                         Contest For The Best Piece

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 21:24:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:49:05 -0400
Subject: Contest For The Best Piece



The Canal Street UFO Illogical Society and Discount House of
Freshly Made Wine, Cheese and Publishing presents:

A contest.

For the best hummer, uh, excuse please, the best "Humor"
Contest. To the person or persons submitting the very best
humorous story, we will reward yous with only the best
Gesundt has to offer.

First Prize:

A case of our newest Freshly Made Wine. We call it,
"Geeze... I can't find my knees!"

Second Prize:

A replica cast in concrete, of the greatest UFOlogist who ever
lived, the Great Gesundt. In this pose, Dr. J. Jaime is firmly
hugging a commode in a pose which will thrill. We call the
piece, "Vectoring with the King!" (of Gripple). You're in good
company when you get sick on Gripple.

Third Prize:

A Ph.D. - a REAL ONE, not just an honorary one - granted by the
Gesundt Society for the preservation of nerds in the
renaissance. This Ph.D. is published by the Canal Street UFO
Illogical Society and... well, you know the rest... printed on
REAL leather from cows slaughtered in England during the Mad Cow
purge. Of course, the Mad Cow has been purged from the leather
but you should not touch the leather, which has been encased in
glass and sealed hermaphroditically, for yous protection.

RULES:

There are very few. Just write an amusing or satirical piece of
a thousand words or more. Subject matter should include UFO's
and we would love to see a biting piece on the subject of UFO
researchers and how they may be punished for their crimes
against humanity. Ours.

Submit your piece to:

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt

Email:

DOCGRIPPLE@AOL.COM

Be sure to include yous email address so we may aks you to give
us your snail mail address... so we can send yous yous
prize(s). Contest void where prohibited by law. Must be 21 years
of age to enter and employees of the Canal Street UFO... blah,
blah Society are not permitted to enter.

Barred from this contest are the following person,
persons and en tities ...

UFO researchers
UFO researchers
Anyone without a sense of humor
Anyone without any sense - of humor or udder wise
Anyone without a sense of humor and a gripe with Gesundt
UFO researchers
Phil Class
Dennis Stacey
Anyone whose name ends in "Clark!" **

Yous woik will be published on the Dr. Gesundt's site on World
Wide Renaissance. Who knows, someone real important might see
it and want yous cypherin for a book or sumpin. Writes to yous
woik will be assigned to the Canal Street UFO... etc.,
publishing division. In perfectal tuity...

J. Jaime

**Not for anything, but there are just too many of yous out there
and it's hard to figger out who is whom. Whom is who... 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                            Secrecy Item Excerpt

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 01:17:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:51:39 -0400
Subject: Secrecy Item Excerpt



I thought the list might be interested in this.

Secrecy item excerpt from:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/sf312.html

which is a reprint of the Classified Information Nondisclosure
Agreement Briefing booklet

Begin excerpt with one RG comment in brackets between
paragraphs.  The SF-312 is the Classified information
NonDisclosure Agreement between individuals and govt.

Question 4: Who must sign the SF 312?

Answer: Executive Order 12958 dated April 17, 1995, requires
that a person may have access to classified information provided
that that person meets three requirements, one of which is
signing an approved nondisclosure agreement. National Security
Decision Directive No. 84, dated March 11, 1983, also provides
that:

"All persons with authorized access to classified information
shall be required to sign a nondisclosure agreement as a
condition of access." Therefore, each person at the time that he
or she is cleared for access to classified information, or each
person who has been cleared previously and continues to require
access to classified information must sign the SF 312, unless he
or she has previously executed one or more of the following:

(a) The SF 189, for cleared employees in both Government and
     industry;

(b) The SF 189-A, for cleared employees within industry; or

(c) A nondisclosure agreement for which the National Security
Council has granted a waiver from the use of the SF 312, the SF
189 or the SF 189-A, as provided in 32 CFR 2003.20.

By tradition and practice, United States officials who hold
positions prescribed by the Constitution of the United States are
deemed to meet the standards of trustworthiness for eligibility for
access to classified information. Therefore, the President, the
Vice President, Members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices,
and other federal judges appointed by the President and confirmed
by the Senate need not execute the SF 312 as a condition of
access to classified information.

{RG Comment:  Although these elected leaders may not be required
to sign a non disclosure form as condition to see classified
data, there is no "guarantee" that any one of these elected
officials see, know of, or are briefed on *every* classified
program that is being run.}

Question 5: Are all Members of Congress entitled to unlimited
access to classified information?

Answer: No. Access to classified information is a function of
three preconditions: (1) A determination of a person's
trustworthiness, i.e., the security clearance; (2) the signing
of an approved nondisclosure agreement; and (3) the exercise of
the "need-to-know" principle, i.e., access is necessary in order
to perform one's job. Members of Congress, as constitutionally
elected officials, are not ordinarily subject to clearance
investigations nor does ISOO's rule implementing the SF 312
require that Members of Congress sign the SF 312 as a condition
of access to classified information. Members of Congress are not
exempt, however, from fulfilling the "need-to-know" requirement.
They are not inherently authorized to receive all classified
information, but agencies provide access as is necessary for
Congress to perform its legislative functions, for example, to
members of a committee or subcommittee that oversees classified
executive branch programs. Frequently, access is governed in
these situations by ad hoc agreements or rules to which the
agency head and the committee chairman agree.

The three basic requirements for access to classified
information mentioned in the opening paragraph apply to
congressional staffs as well as executive branch employees.
ISOO's regulation implementing the SF 312 provides that agency
heads may use it as a non-disclosure agreement to be signed by
non-executive branch personnel, such as congressional staff
members. However, agency heads are free to substitute other
agreements for this purpose.

**********End Excerpt

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 18:24:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:56:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 04:29:02 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 08:49:27 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:23:00 -0400
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell

 >>>>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >>>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400

 >><snip>

 >>I agree Steve. It would be nice to think that this is going to
 >>>make a difference. Somehow I doubt it. Why the Hell should the
 >>>gubbamint suddenly do a 180 on a policy that it has so staunchly
 >>>maintained for half a century or more? Because Greer serves them
 >>>watercress sandwiches at a VIP luncheon? I don't think so.

 >>Maybe with thin slices of good cheese. -LH

 >I swear to Ghot Larry, I hope they actually accomplish something
 >over the next few days. I would purely love to see open hearings
 >on the subject by our elected officials, and pressure applied by
 >large enough numbers of of people for them to induce 'Uncle' to
 >tell us the truth. (by popular demand.) I'd just feel a whole
 >lot better about it if it was somebody like Dick Hall or Stan
 >Friedman or any number of other equally competent people down
 >there coordinating and presenting this thing. It's Greer that I
 >have a problem with. Not the 'concept' of the disclosure project
 >itself. Like I said, I wish them all the luck in the world. I
 >just don't hold out any great expectations.

Agreed.

 >Greer is slicker than snot.

<snip>

 >I grew up just blocks away from the George Washington Bridge bus
 >terminal in Manhattan. Every con man, pick pocket, pimp, junkie,
 >and hustler in the neighborhood used to 'work' the terminal.

<snip>

 >.. I'm sorry, I just don't trust him as far
 >as I can throw him. He hasn't earned any trust either through
 >his actions or his behavior. I am _stunned_ that he has any
 >supporters at all.

<snip>

Me too, and they aren't all babes in the woods.

Greer says in his Executive Summary (in part):

"In 1998, we set out to 'privatize' the disclosure process by
raising the funds to videotape, edit, and organize over 100
military and government witnesses to UFO events and projects. We
had estimated that between $2 million and $4 million would be
needed to do this on a worldwide basis. By August of 2000 only
about 5% of this amount had been raised.. "

That small snippet comes from this very nicely executed web page
(dual frames no less!)

http://www.disclosureproject.org/execsummary/execsummarynonames.htm

(You may need to recombine the long URL, sorry.)

Lets call the target $3 million. 5% of that is $150,000, not
exactly chump change, and this is money Greer openly
acknowledges having received. The bus terminal bunch could learn
from this perhaps, lets hope they don't.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 10

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 19

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:37:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 03:59:59 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 19

Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

UFO FLAP ERUPTS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA

A large number of reddish-orange fireball UFOs have been sighted
in and around Mt. Gambier, in the state of South Australia,
during the past few weeks.

Sightings of the mysterious fireballs have been most common near
Mt. Gambier, Point McDonnell and Pelican's Beach, S.A., in
Australia.

According to Australian ufologist Trevor Raynor, "Newspapers
have again been filled with stories from lots of people who have
sighted these orange-red fireballs. All of the sightings have
been in South Australia. The local Mt. Gambier radio station was
also inundated with calls In fact, they had an 'hour' dedicated
to people to call in and tell or talk about what they had seen."

"Then it was a 'white cloud type' object that was seen, but that
thing remained where it was, and there were no other clouds in
the night sky over Mt. Gambier."

The sightings are being investigated by Trevor Raynor and
director Charmaine Ballam of the Australian UFO Research
Network-South Australia.

There was a UFO sighting elsewhere on the island continent last
week.

On Sunday, April 29, 2001, at 3 a.m., Michael Hodge was in
Wangaratta, in Victoria state, when he saw " a UFO approach from
the northeast."

""Me and my mates were at my house when we saw a big black
disc," Michael reported. "There was lots of moonlight so I saw a
bit. It was large and circular with a round pod at the front
end. It was 300 feet (90 meters) off the ground and moving at
approximately 400 kilometers per hour (250 miles per hour) It
slowed to 60 kilometers per hour (36 miles per hour) and then
flew away to the southeast." (Email Form Report). And thanks to
Diane Harrison of AUFORN for the South Australia reports.)

UFO SURPRISES A TRACTOR DRIVER IN SOUTHERN SPAIN

On Friday, April 13, 2001, Jesus Maldonado, 40, a tractor
operator at Finca Buenavista farm near Alhama de Granada in
southern Spain, "boarded his tractor and began plowing. At 8:30
a.m., he became aware of an intense light towards the east. At
first he thought the light belonged to a motorcycle owned by one
of the farm's goatherders, who was coming over for a chat."

"Suddenly, the light went off, and he was able to see a
truncated conical object rising from the ground to an altitude
of three meters (10 feet). The object might have been three
meters (10 feet) in diameter and two meters (6 feet, 6 inches)
tall. Its appearance was metallic and of a reddish-orange
color."

The object "was able to split into two parts--the lower
(segment) roughly one-third of the object, and the upper part,
roughly two-thirds of the object, which rotated very slowly from
left to right. The object had no windows and no lights and
lacked signs or emblems on its structure."

"The UFO was 200 meters (660 feet) away from Maldonado." The
field was filled with barley. However, because the Spaniard had
only started plowing, most of the field was full of stubble from
last year's crop.

"Maldonado stopped the tractor's motor and observed the object.
Something appeared to protrude from the center of the object
area," but at an oblique angle which prevented him from seeing
it clearly.

"The object began to fly towards the witness, moving along at an
exasperatingly slow rate of speed. The witness was standing on
slightly higher terrainas the object moved towards him, and it
was also rising very slowly to match the terrain. Maldonado
suddenly felt afraid and stated, 'I didn't know whether to start
crying or to run away.'"

"The object placed itself at a distance of 50 meters (150 feet)
from the witness, stopping its forward motion and beginning to
retreat from him at a maddeningly slow rate of speed. It went
beyond its (original) landing point and placed itself over a
neighboring farm known as La Polilla. It then stopped and began
heading towards the witness once again. However, when it passed
over him, heading west, it was now quite high in the air."

"The witness kept watching it as the object rose very high into
the sky and departed." (Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, auto de
los libros, Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico;
y Antonio Salinas de la Sociedade de Investigaciones Biofisicas
para esas noticias.

TWO UFOs HOVER NEAR MONTE CALVO IN ITALY

On Sunday, April 29, 2001, at 9:15 p.m., the male witness and
his 12-year-old brother were standing on their porch at the foot
of Monte Calvo in Italy's Aquila province when they both noticed
"a bright star approaching from the west."

The pair described the UFO as "resembling a white light like a
small-voltage flashlight (torch in UK and Australia--J.T.) The
light hovered near the summit of Monte Calvo (mountain). After a
few minutes, it was joined by another bright white light. Then
the two lights moved in tandem to the left. The lights continued
to move from west to east" before vanishing. (Grazie a Alfredo
Lissoni di Centro Ufologico Nazionale d'Italia per questo
rapporto.)

UFO SQUADRON PASSES OVER NEW PARIS, ILLINOIS

On Sunday, April 29, 2001, at 6:45 p.m., Thomas H. was out in
the backyard of his home in New Paris, Illinois. As he glanced
towards the southeast, he saw several small "aircraft" heading
his way.

Tom took a closer look, and his eyes widened in amazement.
"Approaching from the southeast were many black discs. (At that
distance) They looked like birds, and they flew from side to
side but without turning. The objects were black and
disc-shaped, and their estimated speed was 90 miles per hour
(144 kilometers per hour). They looked to be very, very high up,
maybe 200 miles (320 kilometers), right up there at the edge of
space. The halted and then retreated to the southeast." (Email
Form Report)

HOVERING UFO SEEN IN SOUTH POINT, OHIO

On Friday, April 27, 2001, at 3 a.m., Patricia P. was walking
through the Sheridan Mobile Home Community in South Point, Ohio
when she and her companions noticed an unusual object in the
southern sky.

"We were walking home from my brother's house, which is about
four trailers away from ours," Patricia reported. "There was a
UFO that was hovering over the top of some trees."

"As we looked up, it took off, leaving a bright orange residue
(luminous trail--J.T.). It took off really fast and was going
straight (north) for the hillside, and by the time it reached
the hillside, it was gone. If it had been a plane, it would have
crashed. The object had lights that went on and off like a
plane's (navigation) lights." (Email Form Report)

SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION OR FREAK ACCIDENT?

On Thursday, April 26, 2001, at 2 p.m., three-year-old Brendan
Miller was sitting in the playscape area of his day care center
in Bristol, Connecticut when something strange began to happen.

His shirt suddenly caught fire.

Connecticut "Consumer Protection Commissioner James Fleming was
on hand Monday (April 30, 2001) and tried to set a piece of
paper on fire, using the mirrored dome responsible for setting
three-year-old Brendan Miller ablaze."

"Thursday the little boy was sitting in the dome at 2 p.m. The
dome bounced the sun's rays onto Brendan's shirt, setting it on
fire, giving him second degree burns. Jade Cyr saw Brendan
burning and rolled him on the ground to put out the fire."

"'It didn't make sense. I don't know how he could have caught on
fire. But at the time, I really didn't think about that too
much., i guess, just out of instinct, I did what I had to do,'
Cyr said."

"On the day after the freak accident, a (state) fire marshal
recreated the same conditions. In thirty seconds, the
temperature went from 72 degrees (Fahrenheit) to 250 degrees
(Fahrenheit). All the while, the dome itself never got hot. The
Family Center replaced the dome the same day."

"Investigators were on the scene, testing the removed dome to
determine what happened."

"'We hoped we'd got a jump on it for the safety of the
neighborhood kids,' facilities manager Paul Dailey said."

"The mirrored dome has been taken down and replaced with a clear
plastic one."

"Meanwhile, little Brendan Miller is recovering. His mother says
he was a little leery about being out in the sun but is doing
fine." (See the MSNBC webpage for May 1, 2001. Many thanks to
Louise A. Lowry for this item. Also the New London, Conn. Day
for April 27, 2001.)

(Editor's Note: Bristol, Conn. has a long history of Fortean
phenomena. In July 1907, two "waterspouts" or small tornadoes
miraculously appeared during a clear summer day over Occum Lake.
In June of 1908, a little over a year later, a cylinder-shaped
UFO hovered over the same lake for 20 minutes and was seen by
hundreds of people.)

(Editor's Comment: Congratulations, Brendan! Three years old,
and you're already a celebrity--the first male human being known
to have survived an SHC event. That ought to be good for at
least one guest appearance at a future Fortean Unconvention.)

BLACK HELICOPTERS FLY OVER HOUSTON

Numerous black helicopters performed aerial maneuvers over
Houston, Texas on Saturday, April 28, and Sunday, April 29,
2001.

Craig Y. reports, "For the past two days, I have sighted black
military helicopters flying around the Willowbrook Mall area of
Houston."

"The choppers flying around for the past couple of days don't
just pass through. They circle a couple of times, then fly off
somewhere else, returning to circle the area every couple of
hours. They seem to discontinue around 10 p.m."

"Any idea what they might be looking for? I called the newspaper
and a couple of TV stations last night to report the activity ,
and to ask if they knew, and they basically told me to stop
being so paranoid." (Email Form Report)

(Editor's Comment: Don't feel bad, Craig. The chemtrail spotters
are being told the very same thing. Hmmmmm--looks like the black
helicopters are active again.)

HOLLYWOOD ON TRIAL?

"That 'wascally wabbit's' past is too wascally for the Cartoon
Network."

"The cable net, which is planning an extensive Bugs Bunny
retrospective next month, has decided to leave out a dozen Bugs
'toons because they are considered too racially charged."

"In one episode, Bugs parodies a blackfaced Al Jolson. In
another he calls a buck-toothed Eskimo a 'big baboon.'"

(Editor's Comment: Remember the one set in the South Pacific in
which Bugs hands out disguised grenades to Japanese soldiers,
saying, "Here's one for you, monkey face. Here's yours, four
eyes." And then there's the episode in which Bugs steals the fig
leaf from an unfortunate person of color. My, my, what a "hate
criminal" that wascally wabbit is!)

"Originally the Cartoon Network planned to air the 'toons with a
disclaimer but Warner Brothers, which owns Bugs, According to
the Wall Street Journal, WB was more worried about the impact on
the company's extensive merchandising. But Bugs is not alone.
Many vintage WB cartoons featuring unflattering portraits of
minorities have been withdrawn from the airwaves."

Yes, Hollywood is running scared. The distinguished character
actor, Elmer Fudd, Bugs's co-star in many cartoons, also
appeared in blackface and actually conducted a blackface
orchestra in a minstrel show at the end of one cartoon set in
Canada. Fudd is reportedly considering the retention of Johnnie
Cochrane as his defense attorney, saying, "Like I told Bugs in
1955, I may be cwazy, but I ain't going to Alcatwaz."

Another star who may be in trouble with the thought police is
Cheetah, 68, who was Johnny Weismuller's co-star in several
Tarzan movies from 1934 to 1944. Cheetah was born in Nigeria in
1933, came to the USA as a baby and is now retired and living in
Florida.

Jomo Umgawa, assistant deputy UN undersecretary-general for the
investigation of hate crimes, denounced Cheetah as "a traitor to
the sacred cause of African unity" because he had appeared in a
film in which "white Euro-cultural oppressors flogged people of
color."

He also charged the simian actor with having been a Nazi
sympathizer in World War Two.

"I have seen a 1943 black-and-white film of Cheetah making a
radio broadcast to an appreciative Nazi audience," Umgawa said,
"Afterwards, Cheetah stood up and gave the Nazi salute."

Confident of acquittal, Cheetah said he was "ready for my day in
court at the Hague" and promised "the biggest show since the
Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925," which took place in Tennessee.
(Believe it or not, this actually appeared in USA Today for May
7, 2001, "Bugs Bunny docked for racism," page 1D. Well...not all
of it. The parts about Elmer and Cheetah are strictly satire, a
concept which I'm certain is completely wasted on the United
Nations and the rest of the politically-correct crowd.)


 From the UFO Files...

1954: AN UNUSUAL HOUSE GUEST IN PERU

The city of Ayacucho in southern Peru is most famous for being
the site of the last battle for independence in South America.
The battle was fought in 1824. Approximately 130 years later, in
1954, another event occurred, this time at the height of a South
American UFO flap.

I first heard this story in July 1973, when the Keohans and I
took our ramble through the Andes, from Huancayo to Cuzco. This
was "Ancient Astronaut Summer," and while in Ayacucho, I heard
the story of a couple named Jimenez and the mujer fantastica
they had seen in their house.

It was May 1954, which is mid- to late-autumn in Peru, possibly
a Saturday because the Jimenez couple--we'll call them Carlos
and Anita--had gone to the Mercado (open-air Indian
market--J.T.) to do some shopping.

Carlos and Anita Jimenez lived in a two-story house on the Calle
28 de Julio (street), south of the Plaza de Armas and La
Compania church. Their house was Mediterranean or Spanish
Colonial in style, built around a central courtyard . The only
windows facing the street were on the second floor. A locked
door provided the only access to the interior courtyard from the
street.

Having walked home from the market, Carlos unlocked the outside
door. They carried their groceries into the kitchen, and, while
they were stocking cupboard shelves, sharp=eared Anita heard a
noise upstairs. She went to the foot of the courtyard stairs
leading to the second-floor balcony. She listened carefully. No,
she hadn't been hearing things. There it was again--a sound like
soft footsteps.

Her husband joined her. "What is it?"

"Somebody is up there," she whispered.

So up the stairs they went, with Carlos in the lead. They
examined all three bedroom's on the floor--their master bedroom,
the guest bedroom, Anita's mother's bedroom--and the family
chapel. No sign of any intruders.

As they walked past their own bedroom, Anita had a strong
feeling that someone was in there. She grabbed her husband's
arm, put her left index finger to her lips and had him flatten
against the stucco wall. They waited breathlessly for almost a
minute. And then they heard the soft footsteps inside their
bedroom. Together Carlos and Anita rushed through the open
doorway. Then they stopped short, gaping in astonishment.
Standing on the other side of the bed was a beautiful young
woman. She looked shocked at first. Then her expression was a
blend of frustration and dismay.

Carlos wasn't exactly a big help to the Policia Municipal. He
said the intruder was "very pretty" with "an impressive bosom."
Anita, on the other hand, provided a wealth of details. She
described the intruder as 1.7 meters (5 feet, 6 inches) tall and
slender, with a honey-gold tan and an exuberant mass of curling
and wavy auburn hair. She had golden hoop earrings and sandals
to match. And her attire was a bit skimpy for the Andes. Anita
described it as "an avocado-green French swimsuit (bikini--J.T.)
and a bolero jacket of the same color with elbow-length
sleeves." The intruder had what looked like a white plastic cast
on her left forearm.

Anita broke the silence, "Who are you? What are you doing in our
house?"

"How did you get in here?" Carlos asked.

The intruder looked at them both for a long moment, then replied
in halting Spanish. "Me llamo Jelu. No estoy de aqui." ("My name
is Jelu. I am not from around here.")

Then the intruder lifted her left forearm. The Jimenez couple
saw twinkling multicolored lights flashing along its length. The
woman began tapping it as if it were a typewriter.

Instantly a wall of fine red mist appeared between them and
Jelu.

Getting frightened, Anita said, "I'm calling the police!"

Ignoring them, Jelu turned and faced the stucco wall behind the
bed. She began tapping her thick plastic wrist device again.

Carlos rounded the bed, one hand reaching out to detain her. "Un
momento, senorita..."

But as his fingers made contact with the mist, he let out a
scream and tumbled to the carpet. Anita rushed to her husband's
side. White-faced and gasping, Carlos tenderly cradled his
stricken hand. His fingers and thumb were covered with small red
blisters.

"What did you do!?" Anita shouted.

Suddenly, a circle of golden light appeared on the wall, as if
there was a hand-held flashlight on the other side. The light
circle swiftly grew until it reached from the floor to the
ceiling. The light was soft and resembled "oil floating on
water," Carlos later told police.

The intruder stepped into the light--and vanished.

The red mist disappeared, as well.

With his wife's aid, Carlos sat on the edge of the bed, gritting
his teeth in pain. Rushing to the bedroom window, Anita said,
"I'll get help."

As she pushed open the latticework shutters, Anita got another
surprise.

Before she could cry out, she saw the intruder several meters
down the street, heading north towards La Compania church. Anita
blinked in disbelief. The woman had left only 20 seconds ago.
How could she have gotten down the street? Indeed, if not for
that towering auburn hairstyle, she never would have recognized
Jelu. For the intruder was now wearing typical Andean clothes--a
voluminous dark skirt, a cardigan sweater and a black knit
shawl.

"Help! Help! We need a doctor here!" Anita yelled from the
upstairs window. And pointing at the intruder, she added, "Stop
her! She's a thief! She broke into our house!"

Jelu looked back only once and quickened her step.

"Carlos, she's right outside!" Anita said, running for the
bedroom doorway. Favoring his injured hand, Carlos followed
suit. The couple reached their front gate just as Jelu reached
the plaza. Shouting, they charged up the street, followed by
curious neighbors, only to watch haplessly as Jelu flagged down
a colectivo, hopped into the back seat and sped away (Editor's
Note: A colectivois a sort of itinerant taxicab that follows a
set route around a Peruvian city.)

The police visited the Jimenez house and interviewed the couple.
No one had tampered with the door's lock, and there were no
items missing from the premises. The officers thought the couple
had been victimized by "a crazy woman" acting out some burglar
fantasy.

The Ayacucho residents who told me this story insisted that the
incident had taken place during a major UFO flap in South
America. I was not in Ayacucho long enough to confirm the
Jimenez story. But I did find a mention of a major UFO sighting
in the neighboring country of Bolivia.

In 1955, Frederick O. Hehr, a California businessman who was
living in La Paz, the capital of Bolivia, mailed a photostat of
his diary to British Ufologist Harold T. Wilkins.

Hehr wrote, "Curious discoidal object seen in the skies today
(May 6, 1954). It was low on the southern horizon and looked
like a discus, perfectly circular with bright color, Got a
glimpse of it as it moved away from La Paz."

So there the matter rests. If any of our readers in Peru have
any more information about l'affaire Jimenez, send us an email
at UFO Roundup. (See the book Flying Saucers Uncensored by
Harold T. Wilkins, Citadel Press, New York, N.Y., 1955, page
234.)

Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more
UFO and paranormal news from around the world, brought to you by
"the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you then!

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2001 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.


E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
or use the Sighting Report Form at:

http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences,
UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of
Filer's Files and Oz 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                           Greer Press Conference

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 13:09:28 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:02:39 -0400
Subject: Greer Press Conference


Today's Washington Post has a story of about 30 column-inches
about the press conference that starts on the first page of the
Style section (i.e., light entertainment). It is written by the
resident humorist, Joel Achenbach, who of course pokes fun at
the whole thing. His conclusion (paraphrased): either highly
elusive space visitors are being covered up by a vast Government
conspiracy or "some people believe in things that aren't true."

The tragedy is that some of the witnesses who have fallen under
Greer's slimy and manipulative control are highly credible and
their reports are worthy of a Congressional investigation. But
that will never happen because Greer spouts a lot of grandiose
nonsense from the platform that makes the whole thing look
silly.


Richard Hall
Retired from Congressional Information 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                       WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 05:42:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:21:29 -0400
Subject: WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus



Hello, all (sigh)

The Klowns are now in the center ring -this is one of
(unfortunately) many links to the briefing. I also saw a bit on
CNN, MSNBC, and of course, ABC.

abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/ufo010509.html

I fear to the serious folks, of all stripes this is a disaster.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                    Disclosure Project - Serious Problems

From: Georgina Bruni  <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:49:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:25:49 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems


Having just listened and watched almost two hours of tape,
recorded at Steven Greer's Disclosure, I have a few comments.

I was shocked to hear Larry Warren talk about pencil thin beams
of light that penetrated the [Bentwaters] base and had possibly
affected the nuclear weapons. Also that he claims to have had
secret security clearance and had guarded the nuclear weapons.
He also claims (when asking to talk to the press) that  it shook
the special relationship between Her Majesty's Government and us

Having investigated the Rendlesham Forest case, there is no
evidence that I am aware of that the UFOs penetrated the
Bentwaters base, only that they were hovering over the
Woodbridge base (approximately 5 miles away). In my book You
Can't Tell The People  I produce testimony from credible
witnesses who were actually in the weapons storage area during
the encounter, this included Sergeant Rick Bobo who was on guard
in the tower and told to watch the UFO over at Woodbridge, and
they absolutely deny that there was an incident at Bentwaters,
as do all the other witnesses I interviewed. Colonel Halt only
mentions that the UFOs were seen over Woodbridge. There were no
nuclear weapons on Woodbridge in 1980, only Bentwaters.
Therefore the beams would not have penetrated the nuclear
weapons, and contrary to what Larry constantly claims,
Bentwaters did not deploy  the biggest NATO stockpile of nuclear
weapons .

Also, I cannot understand how Larry, who had only been on duty
approximately 2 weeks, could have had secret clearance and be
allowed to guard nuclear weapons. I also have no idea why he
would suggest that the incident had affected Britain's
relationship with America.

More of Larry's testimony is featured on the Disclosure website
(see GG: US Air Force, Security Officer)

  "We were gone over with a Geiger counter and there was one
  return on one of the guys, and something was taken out of his
  pocket. This guy was removed very quickly. And, I will swear on
  my life, I never saw him again. He was removed. This happened
  to a lot of people. It led to a suicide that the Air Force is
  responsible for. This is a real person with a real name"

Having examined the Air Force records for that period I found no
suicides, only an attempted suicide which I believe was Steve La
Plume's. But not relying on their records I checked various
other sources and found no evidence. also, none of the witnesses
or any staff member of the USAF at Bentwaters/Woodbridge during
that time can recall any suicides.

<snip>

  "Two people came up behind each of us, and I do remember
  someone heading toward him, and I heard the sound of what
  sounded like an aerosol. And, I went black. My nose ran
  profusely and my chest got tight. I, obviously, was not getting
  into the car properly, so I was beaten, literally hit in the
  ribs and pushed" Anyway, I have 20 minutes of recall and I�m
  gone for a day. And, it�s established with other people. People
  said I was on emergency leave or on leave or off the base. But
  I was just under the base. And, there were other personnel down
  there.

  "I had marks, by the way, from an IV, or something, when I came
  out of there. I had the bruise and I had a bandage. I will
  admit that. That�s for real. I had it. I�m terrified to know or
  think of what might have happened"

Correct me if I am wrong but this is the first time I have heard
that Larry had only been missing for  one  day, wasn't it always
3 days? And isn't this the first time we hear that he had been
bandaged?

  "The only reason I have my records is because I was advised to
  steal some of them, by an Air Force Colonel, because he said they
  would vaporize you. He said, they are going to fireproof you. I
  was looked at, almost like a Frank Serpico kind of guy. I was
  not a team player because I was talking to everyone"

Having recently denied (in a series of questions directed at me)
that he never talked to anyone. Here he is again admitting that
he was talking to everyone.

   Unfortunately, my friend, Alabama, went AWOL trying to get
  back home. At O�Hare Airport, he was captured by the FBI and
  returned to duty immediately. All he wanted to do was go home.
  But he was put back on flight duty. I was riding with the
  senior master Sergeant on vehicle patrol, just totally
  depressed with everything, when Alabama called in - this is a
  real person - and said he was going to kill himself if he
  couldn�t go home. And, this guy turned the pick-up truck quick
  and was heading toward the post. He said, you stay on the
  goddamn radio... I saw all the units across the flight line
  responding and everything. Anyway, Alabama had a short M16, and
  he put it in his mouth, and took the top of his head off. This
  was the first time I ever saw death, violent death, at 19. We
  were as different as night and day, me and this kid. You know,
  he was the south, I was the north. He was very religious. I
  respect that, but we had nothing in common. He was a nice guy.
  And, they did not do anything to help us.

Nice story, but who is Alabama? If this was a  friend  why has
Larry never given his real name? Like he states earlier,  This
is a real person with a real name!

I am very concerned about Larry Warren testifying in this
important event, not only because his testimony has changed so
much over the years, which certainly has not helped the
Rendlesham Forest case, but because I believe there is some
genuine witness testimony in the Disclosure event and Larry's
testimony in the latter, which I consider erroneous, has not
helped to give it credibility.

I don't know why Larry keeps adding things and changing his
story but I do think he actually believes it as he's telling it.
Maybe he really was messed with. Not, in my opinion, the right
person to testify in front of Congress.

I am also not convinced that Clifford Stone had access to any of
the Rendlesham UFO files or anything else connected with the
case.

No matter what you think of Steven Greer, one has to give him
credit for putting this together but he really should have
checked out the witness testimony first. With a concept like
this one cannot afford to make mistakes.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                          X-PPAC Update - 05-10-01

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ExPPAC@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:24:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:29:53 -0400
Subject: X-PPAC Update - 05-10-01



X-PPAC

Update - May 10, 2001

Disclosure Project Press Conference

By any reasonable criteria, the press conference held at the
National Press Club on the morning of May 9 by the Disclosure
Project, which is headed by Dr. Steven Greer, was a solid
success.

For information on the testimony and other events to follow, go
to:www.disclosureproject.org

For links to the media coverage, go to:
www.x-ppac.org/DP_Media_Links.htm


Webcast Jamming

According to management of ConnectLive.com, which was airing the
webcast of the Disclosure Project press conference, they were
hit with sophisticated jamming. They had never experience
anything like it in the hundreds of webcast the had conducted.It
was not hacking and it was not the result bandwidth.

As a result the webcast was down for about 10 to 15%
of the time.They received hundreds of queries as to
what the problem was.

However, the press conference will be archived in its
entirety for the next six months at:

www.connectlive.com/events/disclosureproject

and a link to this will be up at:

www.disclosureproject.org
www.paradigmclock.com
www.x-ppac.org


X-PPAC Media Schedule (Stephen Bassett)

Saturday, May 12
KTSA AM 550 San Antonio
CyberCity with Jack Landman
9:10 pm EDT
Webcast:http://www.ktsa.com/

'Stange Days...Indeed'
with Errol Bruce-Knapp
CFRB AM 1010Toronto
10:30 pm EDT
Webcast:http://www.cfrb.com/

___________________________________________________

Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee
URL: www.x-ppac.org

E-mail: exppac@aol.com
Phone: 301-990-4290
Fax: 301-990-0199
4938 Hampden Lane, #161
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
  ___________________________________________________

Spread the word about X-PPAC & the politics of disclosure.
Contribute online at:www.x-ppac.org/Contribute.html
or mail to: 4938 Hampden Lane,161 Bethesda, MD 20814
  ___________________________________________________

"There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
if you are willing to give away the credit."
  ___________________________________________________

"The truth costs money, lies on the other hand, will be provided
to you for 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                    Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:31:56 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!


Hi All,

Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
responsibly.

Although there were one or two 'questionable' people among the
witnesses, the remainder sound 'solid enough' to hold it all
together (the overall credibility of the group) should the Press
manage to 'take down' one or two of the witnesses. It all seems
strong enough to withstand some 'chinks in the armor' that may
turn up.

I have already written to my NYS congress person(s) and to
Hillary Clinton in support of open public hearings. I'm still
leary as hell about having Greer handling all of this. As long
as he does "the right thing" I will put my personal opinions
aside and try to support the effort. "Something" is better than
"nothing."

Let's see 'where' this goes from here. What did you guys think
of the press conference?


Regards to all,

John Velez

                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

               NewsNet5 - Woman Learned How To Kill As A Child

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:03:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:33:30 -0400
Subject: NewsNet5 - Woman Learned How To Kill As A Child


Hi listers,

This might be of interest to abuctees and paranoids of
Government (including myself)among us.

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/specialassignment/news-specialassignment-7622632001
0509-130538.html


GT McCoy

"Just because your paranoid doesn't mean there isn't anyone out
to get you."-anon









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                 Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:41:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:41:21 -0400
Subject: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?


Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

 From Bill Hamilton
Skywatch International

5-10-1

I am told there was an earlier effort at disclosure on a
controlled release basis termed "Operation White". Here is a
startling finding that needs to be seriously considered:

Bill H


JFK Was Shot To Prevent Him From Revealing The Truth About ETs
And UFOs

"Citizens of this Earth, we are not alone."

With those dramatic words, President John F. Kennedy intended to
inform the American public and the world at large that the U.S.
government had made contact with aliens from deep space.

But before he could deliver the speech on November 22, 1963, the
beloved leader was cut down by an assassin's bullets.

That is the astonishing claim of JFK researcher Professor
Lawrence Merrick, author of an upcoming blockbuster book Killing
the Messenger: The Death of JFK.

"We now know the real reason why President Kennedy was
assassinated," declared Prof. Merrick of Cambridge, Mass.

"It appears that some individuals within our government were
determined to maintain the secrecy surrounding captured UFOs --
and decided to silence the President before he could speak."

Prof. Merrick says he began a search for the undelivered speech
after learning the President's original handwritten notes had
fallen into the hands of Texas Governor John Connally -- who was
riding in JFK's death car that fateful day in Dallas.

"I was surprised to find that Kennedy handed Connally the
speech, which was on note cards, to look at, shortly before the
motorcade set off at 12:55 p.m.," said Prof. Merrick.

The governor was badly wounded in the gun attack.

"Connally was terrified for his own life," said the historian.

"He placed the bloodstained index cards in a safety deposit box
with orders to a trusted aide that the contents not be revealed
until after his death."

When Gov. Connally died in 1993, the aide removed the cards and
held on to them.

Last year, Prof. Merrick tracked down the aide, who passed the
speech on with a guarantee of anonymity.

Prof. Merrick was flabbergasted when he read the cards. He took
them to five handwriting analysts, who agreed the speech was "95
percent certain" to be Kennedy's.

Research reveals that just days before his trip to Dallas, JFK
met with his predecessor President Dwight D. Eisenhower, notes
Prof. Merrick.

"I believe he was seeking advice on whether to go public with
the facts about UFOs," Prof. Merrick said. "But other government
insiders apparently felt the truth about UFOs would cause
widespread panic. And they were willing to kill to keep the
information secret.

"I hope now President Clinton will give the speech that should
have been delivered 36 years ago."

Here is what the President would have said:

My fellow Americans, people of the world, today we set forth on
a journey into a new era. One age, the childhood of mankind, is
ending and another age is about to begin.

The journey of which I speak is full of unknowable challenges,
but I believe that all our yesterdays, all the struggles of the
past, have uniquely prepared our generation to prevail.

Citizens of this Earth, we are not alone. God, in His infinite
wisdom, has seen fit to populate His universe with other beings
-- intelligent creatures such as ourselves.

How can I state this with such authority?

In the year 1947 our military forces recovered from the dry New
Mexico desert the remains of an aircraft of unknown origin.
Science soon determined that this vehicle came from the far
reaches of outer space. Since that time our government has made
contact with the creators of that spacecraft.

Though this news may sound fantastic -- and indeed, terrifying
-- I ask that you not greet it with undue fear or pessimism. I
assure you, as your President, that these beings mean us no
harm.

Rather, they promise to help our nation overcome the common
enemies of all mankind -- tyranny, poverty, disease, war.

We have determined that they are not foes, but friends. Together
with them we can create a better world. I cannot tell you that
there will be no stumbling or missteps on the road ahead.

But I believe that we have found the true destiny of the people
of this great land: To lead the world into a glorious future.

In the coming days, weeks and months, you will learn more about
these visitors, why they are here and why our leaders have kept
their presence a secret from you for so long.

I ask you to look to the future not with timidity but with
courage. Because we can achieve in our time the ancient vision
of peace on Earth and prosperity for all humankind.




                       MainPage
                   http://www.rense.com



             This Site Served by TheHostPros










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                   Re: Space Defense Initiative - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:05:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:45:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Space Defense Initiative - Aldrich


 >From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 08:03:12 EDT
 >Subject: Space Defense Initiative
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Regardless of one's opinion of Steven Greer, it is interesting
 >to note the coincidence in timing of the following announcement
 >and the CSETI disclosure conference slated for tomorrow.

Look, Tim, Greer, a Fifth Columnist, wants the wonderful space
based Defense system, made possible by Corso's seeding of
technology, dismantled so that the evil ETs can be whistled down
to make Greer their Quisling on earth. Now, if you read the last
two pages of Corso's book, you will know that there already
exists a giant spacebased system keeping the ETs at bay.
Rumsfeld's announcement is just misdirection.

I think Corso should be properly recognized! To that end I have
preliminary designs on a statue showing a larger than life Corso
resolutely holding high with his left arm a shield to fend off a
blow from above by an evil alien with the visage of Greer. In
his right hand, Corso wields a broad sword, he is caught in
mid-motion as he is about to deal a telling blow to the alien.
Below at Corso's firmly planted feet in much smaller execution
are representatives of all humanity, some cowering from the look
of the monstrous ET, while most are marveling and looking with
awe on the warrior defend his own.

A simple plaque, "Philip Corso, warrior, statesman, Savior of
Mankind" will be placed below Corso on a stone platform.

Send contribution, big contributions, to Jan Aldrich, REKCUS
Foundation, 26 Takemarks, 2 Cleaner Place, Cheetum, CT 06299,
USA, Free Earth.

To think all these years, I just wanted to investigate UFOs.
What a waste! Now I have found my true calling: seeing that
proper recognization is given to great heroes such as Corso, and
making sure that our great space-based defenses are not
dismantled by flashlight wielding crazies.


Jan Aldrich
Colonel-in-Chief
Canterbury Fusileers

Keep Earth Free Don't Disband Our Defenses in the Face the Evil
ET Enemy!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                           THE WATCHDOG - 05-10-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:00:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:48:08 -0400
Subject: THE WATCHDOG - 05-10-01


UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"
http://www.ufowatchdog.com

***NEWS***

~ ABC News: UFOs, Aliens and Secrets
~ UPDATED: Alleged Roswell Crash Debris Is No More
~ Report on 'Ice Pictogram' in Churchville, Maryland
~ UFOs Still Good For Fyffe, Alabama
~ ET Hunter Software Nears 3 Million Users
~ REED HOAX Update Page Added
~ The Truth Is In Here - NY Daily News Covers Disclosure Project
~ New UFO Footage In Ongoing Washington State Case
~ 'UFO Cam' Coming Soon

~Ad *First Annual Northwest UFO/Paranormal Conference* Ad~
http://www.seattleartbellchatclub.com/NWUFO.html
UFOWATCHDOG.COM will be covering this conference...see you there!

***OF INTEREST***

HEY! SPEAK UP!! Your thoughts, views and comments wanted - How
do you view the current state of Ufology? Send comments to:
ufowatchdog@earthlink.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                           Roswell Debris Crashes

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:57:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:57:06 -0400
Subject: Roswell Debris Crashes



 From UFO UpDates - Toronto

Source: ufowatchdog.com


http://www.ufowatchdog.com/nomore.html

by

Royce J. Myers III

UPDATE, 09-MAY-2001: Whitley Strieber has posted an announcement
to his website in which he is now stating that the Roswell
fragment is of earthly origin and shows no signs of being
extraterrestrial. Strieber had earlier proclaimed, ""We also
have non-earth isotopic ratios in the object. This is as close
to proof that the object was manufactured on another world as
any ever obtained. It has affected me profoundly, as it ends, in
my mind, the debate about whether or not the visitors are from
another dimension, or somehow part of our mind."

The way it was being reported, one may have been led to believe
that Strieber had actually been directly involved with the
testing of the alleged UFO debris. Striber stated, "I had not
been given all the information about the early testing of the
object when I made the statement [above]...I was led to believe
that the only tests ever done on the object showed extraordinary
isotopic ratios. I was given copies of these tests, and they
appeared to be in good order and entirely legitimate."

Regarding the testing of the object Striber stated, "Our
retesting of the object showed normal isotopic ratios. They were
dramatically different from the ratios found in the first test.
I immediately became concerned that something was wrong with the
old test and began to investigate it. I found the scientist who
did the original tests, whom I had been told had "disappeared."
He explained that he, also, had retested the object--way back in
1997--and found the ratios to be normal, and explained why his
original test had been in error."

Strieber was to host the May 12th, 2001 UFO X Files UFO Internet
Conference. The conference's cancellation was followed by rumors
of the UFO X Files website being hacked, pressure from unknown
sources to shut down the conference, lack of revenue for the
conference and poor test results to list just a few. Apparently
UFO X Files website is still up but the home page has been
replaced with a black screen. One UFOWATCHDOG.COM reader pointed
out that the title of the page is 'New Page 2.' UFO X Files has
not responded to a request for an interview regarding the metal
and the conference.

It looks as though the UFO community may have once again been
duped. What impact will the Roswell crash debris dud have on
UFOlogy? How many more frauds, hoaxes and poorly investigated
cases can UFOlogy take? This incident may have killed any future
revelations or claims of crash debris from the Roswell case.
Another instance of someone screaming smoke before the gun has
even been fired...

<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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:43:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 05:54:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 16:58:47 +0100


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 09:32:33 -0500

 >>>From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 11:51:30 +0100


Dr. Dave,

 >>>Take your 'UFO Encyclopedia' for instance - of all the hundreds
 >>>of cases and reports detailed, _some_ of these must be hoaxes
 >>>and misidentifications.

 >..and you replied:

 >>For a guy who actually wrote and published a generous review of
 >>that book, you seem strangely obtuse (or, more to the point,
 >>disingenuous).

 >Perhaps I'm not the only one who should have pondered carefully
 >before typing as you appear to persistently misinterpret
 >everything I write. I stick by my generous review of your tome,
 >which I would happily recommend to my students as a textbook if
 >it wasn't so expensive.

Thank you, and I don't mean that sarcastically.

 >However my point was not to criticise but to point out that the
 >case material it contains simply must contain a significant
 >percentage of hoaxes and misidentifications. I'm quite aware
 >that you devote space to the discussion of this category of
 >report, but that simply supports what I'm saying - that ufology
 >is as much a study of human imagination and perception as it is
 >of alleged 'ET visitation.'

Well, that's true, of course, but not only of ufology. As Henry
Bauer writes eloquently in his new book Science or Pseudoscience
(University of Illinois Press, 2001), that's also true of
science, which has been wrong far more often than it has been
right. Anything that's processed through humans, however noble,
is subject to the fallibility of humans.

 >>>Surely it is in your own interests that ET does not land on the
 >>>White House lawn, because if this should happen perhaps 99
 >>>percent of the material in your book would be revealed as
 >>>nothing but wishful thinking.

 >>If this strange sentence has any meaning to anyone who
 >>doesn't speak pelicanese, please let me know.

 >Squawk, squawk, squawk (see above). Does it make sense now?

No.


Cordially,

Jerry Clark*

*admittedly related to the Clarkes of the world - an entirely
honorable branch (albeit shaky spellers and occasionally
misguided on larger cosmic issues) of the Clark clan, who prefer
the more succinct spelling but who nonetheless do not disown
those who, for reasons best known to themselves, insist on the
silent "e"











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                Disclosure Project Press Conference - Bassett

From: Steve G. Bassett SGBList2@aol.com
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 02:04:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 06:04:50 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Bassett


For the record:

There were 235 people in the main room of the National Press
Club for the Disclosure Project PC. [I hand counted them. Joel
Achenbach of the Washington Post said there was around 100. He
was wrong. He often is.] Of those 235, about 90 were working
press and camera crews. It was one of the best attended press
conferences held at the National Press Club during the past 20
years. The press conference was webcast worldwide. There were in
excess of 100,000 attempts to log on.

There were 17 news cameras. These included the local ABC and NBC
affiliates, CNN, Fox News Channel, Fox News local WTTG, BBC, ABC
national, and other foreign crews.

Considerable additional press interest is developing.

The best piece to date was written by Julia Duin of the
Washington Times. The worst piece to date was written by Joel
Achenbach of the Washington Post.

Regards,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Bott

From: Murray Bott <murrayb@win.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 18:06:01 +1200 (NZST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 06:15:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Bott


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:14:06 -0700



Greetings List

Bill Sawers wrote:

 >I think the "FBI trouble" is more like petty jelousies,
 >bickering and politicing (sp) exacerbated by DeLoach. If Corso
 >was such a "rat" he most certainly would have been found out and
 >wouldn't have been in any position of power.

Welcome Bill

I do have a copy of the FBI File on Corso. I will copy this ASAP
and would like to drop by over a cup of coffee and give it to
you

Your response welcome - please respond via private Email


Regards,

Murray Bott

Email : murrayb@win.co.nz
Voice : 64-9-6345285
Snail : PO Box 27117, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1030, New Zealand







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                      Disclosure Project, Filer & Stone

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:40:57 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 06:23:01 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project, Filer & Stone


I just thought I'd let everyone know that the UFO Disclosure
Project was featured on Sky News [UK] this morning. In a serious
piece they showed clips of interviews with Clifford Stone and
George Filer.


Philip

--
Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive, Batley, West Yorkshire, England, WF17 7SW.
Tele: 01924 444049. E-mail: pmquest@dial.pipex.com
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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 06:40:49 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"


The Cydonian Imperative
5-11-01

An Independent Look at Tom Van Flandern's "Crowned
Face"

by Mac Tonnies


Full linked, illustrated version, visit:

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html



[image]


The "Crowned Face." Speculative highlighting (right) by Dr. Tom
Van Flandern neglects portions of "crown" feature.

One of the most interesting of Dr. Tom Van Flandern's images,
shown at a recent press conference resembling his prior
appearance at the Washington Press Club (discussed on a previous
page), shows a remarkably human-like visage gazing out from the
wall of a Martian cliff. Unlike many of Van Flandern's
anomalies, the so-called "Crowned Face" is not seen in profile,
making it both easier for nonbiased viewers to see,
and--possibly--easier for planetary SETI to investigate.

Although I find the Crowned Face more and more interesting upon
repeated viewing, my initial reaction--that this is probably, if
not certainly, a natural formation--remains largely unchanged.
But deciding what Martian "faces" are worth investigation and
which aren't unleashes an epistemological nightmare. Who are any
of us to judge a given anomaly? After all, we're all
"terrestrially biased," whether we want to admit it or not. If
certain features on Mars are actually artificial, then we know
essentially nothing about the civilization that built them (such
as why there is a human face in Cydonia).

Presumably the hypothetical "Martian" civilization was
constrained by the same laws of physics experienced on Earth,
but venturing much farther than that plunges the planetary SETI
question into increasingly nebulous (albeit ultimately
falsifiable) theories that are easily scoffed away as wishful
thinking, or the Jungian desire to project our collective
desires onto the surface of another world.

So what does Van Flandern's "Crowned Face" represent? Only a few
candidate signs for possible artificial origin can be observed.
The facial dimensions, for example, seem quite accurate. The
"nose" appears to be an actual nose-shaped protuberance with
possible suggestions of nostrils (although these appear somewhat
lop-sided). There are no eyes, per se, but the brow features
reasonably symmetrical arches where eye sockets can be easily
inferred. The "mouth," if it is indeed a mouth, is a mere
suggestion, but nevertheless consistent with the hypothesis that
the Crowned Face is a highly eroded, inconceivably ancient ruin.

Unlike the clear rectilinear border seen framing the face in
Cydonia, there is no defined edge to the Crowned Face's
right-hand ride. As with the "mouth," this feature is inferred
by the seeming consistency of the other supposed facial
features. The Crowned Face is also topped with a symmetrical
"crown" of what looks like random boulders, with one exception:
there is a central indentation in the edge of the cliff that
recalls the "Egyptian" "stripe" seen on the Cydonia face.

There is an overall impression of bisymmetry and facial detail
that, although fascinating, seems to be largely superficial.
Unlike the Cydonia face (to use a much-studied example) the
Crowned Face does not appear in isolation, but rather as a
series of natural-looking ripples. One such "ripple," I suggest,
is the feature construed as a "mouth." The fact that the Crowned
Face is a very shallow feature, with no prominent shadows (as
might be expected from a carving intended to stand the test of
time) makes testing for artificiality exceptionally difficult;
it's very hard to predict, based on photographic data, if the
facial likeness will persist from different viewing angles and
angles of illumination. My own prediction that it will, by
virtue of its flatness. But I also doubt that any forthcoming
images will reinforce the Artificiality Hypothesis by showing us
additional anthropomorphic detail. The opposite, of course,
proved true with the Cydonia face, on which "nostrils," "lips"
and even an anatomically accurate "eye" were revealed by
high-resolution imaging.

A useful standard in assessing a given anomaly's potential
artificiality is the anomaly's ability to conform with a priori
criteria. If the Crown Face is indeed a huge sculpture, then
better images should show internal detail strengthening the
facial resemblance. But until such images are taken, no one can
be absolutely sure.

Van Flandern is to be credited for drawing attention to a
face-like surface feature that is not of the endlessly
questionable "profile" variety found elsewhere in his slide
presentation. While I don't think the Crowned Face represents
intelligent design, it at least provides us with the ability for
high-resolution imaging to help settle the debate using
scientific methodology. In my opinion, the same cannot be said
for Van Flandern's "Nefertiti" image and various animal
likenesses.

-end-









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:41:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Kaeser


 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >responsibly.


John,

 From a technical perspective, I think it went as well as they
could have expected. But did it make any points that the press
could take aware with them and build on?

This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
they are.

Paul Nahay of X-Pac has put up a good listing of the coverage
thus far:

http://pnahay.home.sprynet.com/ufo_disclosureproject.htm

This may not include a new link to the BBC's report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1322000/1322432.stm

I'm not sure they're getting the type of coverage they were
hoping for.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                           Greer Press Conference

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:31:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:00:15 -0400
Subject: Greer Press Conference


Good Afternoon All -

I have spent a good part of the day trying to figure out why I
am angry about Dr. Greer's news conference. It certainly isn't
because I wasn't invited because I have rejected three offers to
appear on national programs in the last year. One of them, on
The History Channel, was about the closing of Project Blue Book
and I couldn't see any reason to fly out to the east coast for a
segment of a program that would last, at best, eight minutes,
when they told me that they had Colonel Friend, who was once a
chief of Blue Book, and a couple of scientists, already booked.
I figured I'd spend three days doing all this and then end up on
the cutting room floor.

But I digress.

I believe the reason that I was angry was the inclusion of
people who were obviously making up their "insiders" knowledge.
I don't want to mention any names here (Sergeant Cliff Stone),
but one of them, who had started out as a rather knowledgeable
man, and who had some interesting insights, evolved into someone
who had been involved in every UFO sighting since before he was
born. True, he suggested that he had seen files, or films, or
whatever, but he had been there in some fashion.

In the October 1998, Volume 13, No. 6 issue of UFO, Cliff tells
us about his experiences as one of those on the inside. He
begins his tale, "Four years of my 22 1/2 years in the military
were spent in the Republic of Vietnam..." I must say that makes
him one of the men who spent the most time there. Even Special
Forces troops rarely could relate more than 3 tours, yet Stone
has four. I only managed one.

Continuing, he wrote, "First thing I did was announce to the
first sergeant that I really was not good at typing. I
immediately requested assignment to a combat unit, but my
request was denied.

"This did not stop me from various times crawling out through
our, what we called a 'kill zone', which was a 300-meter area
that was cleared in front of our perimeter all the way around
the base camp. When crawling out of that kill zone, at nights
and now and then, I'd run into an enemy patrol or something of
this sort and I would actually find my self shooting at the
enemy and the enemy shooting at me."

Let me be the first to say, "Ha ha ha ha." Now, as a warrant
officer, I found myself with the extra duty, twice, of
responsibility for the security of the camp. One night I was the
officer in charge of a small section of the bunker line and the
other time, I had overall "command" of the entire defense. Of
course, if anything happened, high ranking officers would have
been there immediately. I was sort of the first line of defense,
with authority to open fire. Had I seen any firing in the wire,
at any time, I would have authorized the troops to open fire to
try to kill anything that continued to move out there.

Let me relate two stories. One night (while another warrant
officer) had command of our section of the bunker line, he
opened fire on movement in the wire. Yes, he had to pay for the
dead cow. (Well, maybe he didn't, but the US government did).
See how trigger happy they were... Of course, anything in the
wire was a bad guy.

Two, I know an officer who opened fire one night on a shape seen
in the wire. They relentlessly hammered, using the M-60 machine
guns, the newly constructed grave (because of the high water
table, many of the graves were above ground) of a Vietnamese. It
was, of course, far outside the wire, but distances can be
deceiving at night.

Stone claimed that one night, after seeing lights in the trees,
he crawled out through the wire and was met by a "gentleman who
was involved in a couple of other situations I had been involved
in. I always called him the colonel because I did not know what
his rank was... All I knew was that when we were involved in
some of the recovery or investigation efforts, this was the man
who was always in charge."

Well, you get the drift. This story is so full of, well, it's
unbelievable. Don Ecker, in the same issue, points out that if
Stone had actually done what he claimed, he would have been
AWOL, at the very least, and so shot full of holes that he would
have whistled when he walked.

I might point out that there were good reasons for these rules.
First, since Stone was a clerk-typist, he would not have been
privy to the operational orders under which a "real" patrol
might have functioned. He could have easily compromised their
mission and that could have resulted in their deaths. Second,
his screwing around out in the wire could have put the entire
base at risk, especially if people had to determine that one of
ours was in the wire before they opened fire. And, third, these
sorts of tales, of secret missions through the wire just aren't
true.

For those of you who want a good laugh, find the article. I told
Stone, to his face, that I knew the story was crap and he knew
it was crap, but he said it was all true.

Oh, one other Stone tale. When I first met him, he showed me the
sticker for "on base privileges" that was on the front bumper of
his car. He asked me why, if he was really a sergeant, his was
blue because blue was reserved for officers. I didn't tell him
that about five years earlier they changed the system so that
all the stickers were blue, and the color code had been reduced
to the little sticker that named the base. Officers were blue
and NCOs had red, and the base sticker Stone had was red...

This then is the source of my anger. The real point is if this
is the caliber of Greer's insiders, then they will be exposed
quickly. It's just as obvious that Greer and his team do not
bother to investigate the claims being made. When they are
exposed, we all look as if we have no powers of discrimination
and that we all believe these tales. This is what happens to us
every time we begin to make some progress. People leap on the
bandwagon and we are all tarred with the same brush when these
tales collapse as they always do. It won't take the journalistic
community long to discover that some of these people just do not
have the credentials they claim if they bother to check. Greer
seems to have created a forum that received a great deal of
attention and it will all unravel when some of these people are
exposed. I hate to see a lot of hard work go down because
someone needs his or her fifteen minutes in the limelight.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                    Re: Roswell Debris Crashes - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 11 May 2001 05:47:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:07:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Debris Crashes - Hamilton


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 04:57:06 -0400
 >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Roswell Debris Crashes

 >From UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: ufowatchdog.com

 >http://www.ufowatchdog.com/nomore.html

 >by

 >Royce J. Myers III

 >UPDATE, 09-MAY-2001: Whitley Strieber has posted an announcement
 >to his website in which he is now stating that the Roswell
 >fragment is of earthly origin and shows no signs of being
 >extraterrestrial. Strieber had earlier proclaimed, ""We also
 >have non-earth isotopic ratios in the object. This is as close
 >to proof that the object was manufactured on another world as
 >any ever obtained. It has affected me profoundly, as it ends, in
 >my mind, the debate about whether or not the visitors are from
 >another dimension, or somehow part of our mind."

 >The way it was being reported, one may have been led to believe
 >that Strieber had actually been directly involved with the
 >testing of the alleged UFO debris. Striber stated, "I had not
 >been given all the information about the early testing of the
 >object when I made the statement [above]...I was led to believe
 >that the only tests ever done on the object showed extraordinary
 >isotopic ratios. I was given copies of these tests, and they
 >appeared to be in good order and entirely legitimate."

 >Regarding the testing of the object Striber stated, "Our
 >retesting of the object showed normal isotopic ratios. They were
 >dramatically different from the ratios found in the first test.
 >I immediately became concerned that something was wrong with the
 >old test and began to investigate it. I found the scientist who
 >did the original tests, whom I had been told had "disappeared."
 >He explained that he, also, had retested the object--way back in
 >1997--and found the ratios to be normal, and explained why his
 >original test had been in error."

This was the same as with the Michael Wolf sample that I had
submitted for testing. Dr. Leir was giving out the impression
that all of these samples were unusual because of his restaurant
ice test. Wolf's sample was similar if not identical to this
so-called Roswell piece - just pure silicon slag.

I guess when you are not a metallurgist, a piece of unusual
metal looks pretty impressive especially when a story goes with
it. Wolf's story was that he had a jar of these metal fragments
given to him when he worked at Area 51 - yeh sure! The guard
just said, "Oh, you must be the illustrious Dr. Wolf, please
proceed to take your work home with you".

Now, does anyone out there have an actual piece of a craft?


Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -

From: skywatcher22@space.com
Date: 11 May 2001 05:53:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:46:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -

On Fri, 11 May 2001, UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:


 >Source: Rense.com

 >Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

 >From Bill Hamilton
 >Skywatch International

 >5-10-1

 >I am told there was an earlier effort at disclosure on a
 >controlled release basis termed "Operation White". Here is a
 >startling finding that needs to be seriously considered:

 >Bill H

This was bundled in with a factual report on the Disclosure
Press conference and I posted it without really examining where
it came from... I apologize. It is a bogus story. I have
reposted my finding on Skywatch.

I searched and searched to find out where this story came from
originally because I could find no evidence of a professor
Merrick.

Here is the original unreliable source of this story:

Weekly World News newspaper (Canada) Date: April 30th, 1996.

JFK WAS SHOT TO PREVENT HIM FROM REVEALING TRUTH ABOUT UFOs!

A newspaper notorious for printing bogus stories.

Somehow the JFK urban legends are getting cross-filed with UFO
urban legends!


Bill H









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                    Re: Greer Press Conference - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 11 May 2001 06:03:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:51:25 -0400
Subject: Re:  Greer Press Conference - Hamilton


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Greer Press Conference
 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 13:09:28 -0000

 >Today's Washington Post has a story of about 30 column-inches
 >about the press conference that starts on the first page of the
 >Style section (i.e., light entertainment). It is written by the
 >resident humorist, Joel Achenbach, who of course pokes fun at
 >the whole thing. His conclusion (paraphrased): either highly
 >elusive space visitors are being covered up by a vast Government
 >conspiracy or "some people believe in things that aren't true."

 >The tragedy is that some of the witnesses who have fallen under
 >Greer's slimy and manipulative control are highly credible and
 >their reports are worthy of a Congressional investigation. But
 >that will never happen because Greer spouts a lot of grandiose
 >nonsense from the platform that makes the whole thing look
 >silly.

I agree Richard. I know some of the witnesses and some are very
credible. There is one witness I am happy he did not present
whose testimony added up to a lot of nonsense.

The presentation was good. It might have been better.

I have talked with similar military witnesses who are credible.
The highest ranking retired officer who offered me testimony was
a retired Major General who was dying of cancer. Unfortunately,
he was not around long enough to document his fascinating story.
One thing he said stuck with me. It was his feeling that we have
way too many secrets and that when these secrets are ever
revealed that extraterrestrials will become a reality.

I hope he is right.


Bill Hamilton








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

             Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:09:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:59:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Lehmberg


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

 >>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >>handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >>excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >>listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >>responsibly.

Good for you, Johnny me lad! Your stock _seldom_ fails to go up
with me! <g>. This is forgetting the older gentleman with the
string tie that I thought was going to start yodeling during his
segment (he was _still_ credible), and "Chief Daniels" almost
breaking into his "Man of La Manche" medley. I wanted to put a
bullet in him. <g>. Most of the panel members were _striking_
- raised the hair on the back of MY neck...


 >John,

 >From a technical perspective, I think it went as well as they
 >could have expected. But did it make any points that the press
 >could take aware with them and build on?

...a portentous PLENTY, an inverted paucity, profuse and
plentiful it provided a perspicacious plethora -- providing...
the courage of the individual reporter... I knew what you meant,
but you know what I mean?

 >This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
 >already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
 >by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
 >needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
 >meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
 >they are.

Which is all most of us ever really have - like I have to take
the word of Dr. Zahi Hawas regarding all matters Egyptian and
Gerald Posner's word on JFK (or crash dummies at Roswell)... The
"meat" concerns what's stored in the larder of the interests of
25 trillion dollars, that convenient rigidity of the economic
status quo, and a looming individual autonomy the institutions
of our culture will not tolerate as it means the destruction of
them in their present form. <VBG... just BEAMING!>

 >Paul Nahay of X-Pac has put up a good listing of the coverage
 >thus far:

 >http://pnahay.home.sprynet.com/ufo_disclosureproject.htm

 >This may not include a new link to the BBC's report:

 >http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1322000/1322432.stm

 >I'm not sure they're getting the type of coverage they were
 >hoping for.

I think that can be most certainly predicted that they will not.
Heh... If I hear one more smirking corporate mouthpiece spew the
"why don't they land on the Whitehouse lawn?" question... I'm
going to have a stroke! We should be gratified that 'they' have
the respect for our leadership that 'they' _do_, respecting the
unceasing pattern of corrosive _denial_ that that leadership has
precipitated for the last fifty years!!! We'll hold sullenly to
our confining Aristotelian crystals until this planet implodes
into complete ecological and social catastrophe? Not on _my_
watch!

I've badmouthed Dr. Greer for years and may do so again -- but
this is the single most proactive action initiative that I have
seen regarding UFOs in my memory. ...Enough stout-hearted and
quality people blow on this spark... it _will_ burst into flame,
and then who cares who started it? I think the next step is to
reevaluate Danial Sheehan's idea to bring a civil suit against
the government to stop the militerization of space, and throw
some force behind that. I pledge a hundred bucks to that effort,
as I've said before. If everydody else gives a buck... well -
the 'kingdom' may be at hand!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

             Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:49:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:03:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >To:  UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems
 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:49:55 +0100

Georgina wrote:

 >I was shocked to hear Larry Warren talk about pencil thin beams
 >of light that penetrated the [Bentwaters] base and had possibly
 >affected the nuclear weapons.
 >
 >Having investigated the Rendlesham Forest case, there is no
 >evidence that I am aware of that the UFOs penetrated the
 >Bentwaters base...

Georgina,

The claim is attributed to Col. Halt and was first published in
'Left at East Gate', co-authored by Larry Warren and Peter
Robbins.

A Bentwaters incursion was then seemingly described by Halt
during one of his 1998 interviews with Salley Rayl. The
incursion took place during the second night's events, when Halt
became involved and made his microcassette recording.

I wrote about it when also revealing the account of Sergeant
Randy Smith, who was on duty at the RAF Bentwaters weapons
storage area [WSA] on what seems to have been the same night:

During 1998, Halt was interviewed by American journalist AJS
(Salley) Rayl and elaborated:

"We've crossed the farmer's field past his house and across the
road, stumbled through a small stream and went out into a large
ploughed field. Somebody noticed several objects in the sky to
the north - three objects clearly visible with multiple-colored
lights on them. The objects appeared elliptical and then they
turned full round, which I thought was quite interesting. All
three doing that. They were stationary for awhile and then they
started to move at high speed in sharp angular patterns as
though they were doing a grid search. About that same time,
somebody noticed the south, a similar object, it was round - did
not change shape - and at one point it appeared to come toward
us at a very high speed. It stopped overhead and sent down a
small pencil-like beam, sort of like a laser beam. It was an
interesting beam in that it stayed - it was the same size all
the way down the beam. It illuminated the ground about ten feet
from us and we just stood there in awe wondering whether it was
a signal, a warning, or what it was. We really didn't know."

"It clicked off as though someone threw a switch, and the object
receded, back up into the sky".

"Then it moved back toward Bentwaters and continued to send down
beams of light, at one point near the weapons storage facility.
We knew that, because we could hear the chatter on the radio".

An incredible tale and somewhat disconcerting as the weapons
storage facility has long been rumoured to have housed nuclear
weapons.

[...]

As for the 'beams of light' which Halt claims were being
reported on radio as coming down near the WSA, Randy has no
knowledge of this.

Randy, in fact, can't recall much of what happened afterwards:
"I remember leaving the tower and then I can remember as I was
riding my bicycle home I was thinking that I must have turned in
my weapon because I don't have it with me".

He couldn't think of any significant occurrences in-between.

Except for one thing..

Randy believes that at some point he was, "on top of the
structure near the bunker where you'd go if you were under
attack".

Why he may have thought the WSA was under attack, is something
that poses an enigma and one which Randy would like to resolve.


In the past it's been claimed that RAF Bentwaters held a
'tactical nuclear weapons' stockpile, a fact not acknowledged by
the respective US and UK governments.

Some 20 years later, there's no obvious reason why that should
remain a vital secret and as one former serviceman was on record
as alleging that Bentwaters held the largest 'NATO nuclear
weapons dump', I asked if this entire issue might now be
clarified.

Randy's wife, Kathy, provided considerable assistance in
obtaining answers to what at times seemed an unreasonable amount
of questions. Fortunately, she fully appreciated it was
necessary to understand the context of this new evidence and her
patience, diligence and knowledge of the issues were invaluable.

Kathy responded:

"Yes, of course there were small, 'hot', tactical nuclear
weapons at Bentwaters, as used on an F-16, not large as used on
B-52's and B-1's. However, Bentwaters probably had the least
weapons, not the 'largest NATO dump' by any means. The WSA is
the highest security area on the base. In a 'hot' nuclear area,
you employ the two man concept throughout the entire area, no
single person ever allowed around nukes".

"The bunkers would look like small hills. They were covered with
dirt and had grass growing on them sloped front to back.

There were about 10 bunkers total, the two large on the ends and
8 all within the long middle section. All of these contained
'hot' nuclear weapons. This was Rand's posted position that
night".

"Use of deadly force was authorized".

"The bunkers on each end were defensive fighting positions. That
was where Randy believes (98% positive) he was when
Tsgt.[Technical-Sergeant] Clarence George, the area supervisor,
approached him and asked if he wanted to go up in the tower.
That was where you would take position if you were ever under
attack, not where you'd ever be under normal conditions".

"The bunker is the weapon storage facility itself, where the
nukes are stored. It has thick steel, double doors, 2 high
security padlocks, and the Munitions Maintenance Squadron were
the ONLY people authorized to enter these structures. Up on top,
the SP's [Security Police] had a defensive fighting position - 2
short steel walls, with sandbags in between the walls. The only
time anyone ever went up there was during an exercise to prepare
for an attack. In case of an actual attack, you would follow the
procedures practised during the exercise. It was training or it
was real, no grey areas.

He knows they weren't training that night.

He has tried to recall why he was there that night but simply
can't".
[END OF EXTRACT]

The full newsletter can be read at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/newslet4.htm


 >In my book You Can't Tell The People  I produce testimony from
 >credible witnesses who were actually in the weapons storage area
 >during the encounter, this included Sergeant Rick Bobo who was
 >on guard in the tower and told to watch the UFO over at
 >Woodbridge, and they absolutely deny that there was an incident
 >at Bentwaters, as do all the other witnesses I interviewed.
 >Colonel Halt only mentions that the UFOs were seen over
 >Woodbridge.

As you can see, he evidently also claimed that the object which
emitted a 'beam of light' did so over Bentwaters and near the
WSA there.

This has been a prominent feature since 1998.

Sgt Bobo is mentioned in Sgt Smith's account and they apparently
stood next to each other in the security tower watching 'UFOs'
that night.

 >There were no nuclear weapons on Woodbridge in 1980, only
 >Bentwaters.

That's correct. I understand from sources on base that when the
F-4's were replaced by A-10's then Bentwaters housed a Weapons
Storage Area [WSA], while Woodbridge reverted to a Non-Nuclear
Munitions Storage Area [NMSA].


 >"Unfortunately, my friend, Alabama, went AWOL trying to get back
 >home. At O'Hare Airport, he was captured by the FBI and returned
 >to duty immediately.

 >[...]

 >Anyway, Alabama had a short M16, and he put it in his mouth, and
 >took the top of his head off. This was the first time I ever saw
 >death, violent death, at 19".

 >Nice story, but who is Alabama?

He was Warren's room-mate - see 'Left at East Gate' pages 39-40.

 >If this was a friend why has Larry never given his real name?
 >Like he states earlier,  This is a real person with a real
name!

His Christian name was apparently Alabama.

For what it's worth, in 'Left at East Gate', Warren claims the
person who later committed suicide was "the guy next to me"
during that supposed 'UFO' debriefing. At no time does he name
him as Alabama, or indicate even knowing him.


 >I am also not convinced that Clifford Stone had access to any
of >the Rendlesham UFO files or anything else connected with the
 >case.

Or any of the other celebrated 'UFO' incidents he claims to have
been involved with. There's some topical information and
comments on 'UFO Skeptics' re Clifford Stone's UFO tales.


Most of Warren's story is a product of the dreaded 'hypnotic
regression' and even those 'memories' hugely contradicted later
retellings - see for example, 'Larry Warren and the Foibles of
'Regressive Hypnosis'':

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/v14.txt

Leaving aside the issue of whether _anything_ in Warren's
various, differing accounts are reliable, there's no question
that the discussions between Warren, his co-author Peter Robbins
and Halt, recorded with Halt's permission, were invaluable
evidence and further insight.

The transcripts are published in 'Left at East Gate' and at some
points in the conversation, Halt asks for the tape to be stopped
as he wants to discuss confidential material.

Warren and Robbins made a startling allegation in the book and
Robbins writes of Halt [pp 412-413]:

"He told us several other things, but not before asking me to
turn of the recorder. I complied with each request. Although he
did not say, 'I am telling you this in confidence', that was
what I understood him to mean".

"In July 1994, Halt returned to England and addressed a
conference. Sometime during that weekend, he was speaking
informally with a group of audience members when one of them
asked a question about Larry Warren. Larry had not been there,
came the answer; his account was untrue".

"For me, Halt's response was the equivalent of breaking a
confidence. That is why I have decided to break the confidence
that was implied when Halt asked me to turn of my tape recorder.

He told us...

Light beams had penetrated the hardened bunkers of Bentwaters'
weapons-security area".
[END OF EXTRACT]


During a subsequent CompuServe conference, I had the opportunity
to ask both Warren and Robbins if they could corroborate this
allegation. The transcript records:

James Easton: You claim Halt revealed that beams of light
penetrated the weapons storage area. He has now confirmed that
the 'pencil thin' beams were seen _near_ the storage area, but
that's all. Do you still maintain he confirmed that nuclear
weapons were compromised?

Larry & Peter: Yes -- he told us this face to face when we met
with him in Washington DC  -- it is in the book as well. [END OF
EXTRACT]


Halt's own confirmation that beams of light were directed near
the WSA had not, to my knowledge, been revealed by him until
after the publication of 'Left at East Gate'. I suspect that
it's actually the same claim which Warren and Robbins have taken
to mean, 'penetrated the hardened bunkers'.

However, Sgt Randy Smith neither witnessed or ever heard about
'beams of light' coming down on base, let alone anywhere near
the WSA. Halt reportedly told Salley Rayl that between 30 to 40
people on base observed these 'beams'. Has anyone ever confirmed
witnessing this or even hearing talk of such an extraordinary
occurrence?


Aside from Warren and Robbins' claims, there was a total absence
of what should be palpable supporting evidence that WSA security
was compromised during the second night's events. Indeed, there
was zero evidence of anything out of the ordinary the following
day, with Sgt Smith recalling it was 'business as usual'.

That is... until these past weeks.

As revealed in the latest 'Voyager' newsletter:

Who were these official 'UFO investigators' and why, directly
after one of the incidents, were security personnel and others
in 'plain clothes' so interested in the Weapons Storage Area,
with, as a further new witness now reveals, "everyone being told
to not ask questions, just do our jobs". [END OF EXTRACT]


I can only add, for now, that this new witness was a member of
the 81st EMS, NCOIC of the Munitions Maintenance Shop at
Woodbridge and then moved to 'Bentwaters Missile Maintenance',
where he was on duty during the UFO excitement.

His story of a heightened alert status immediately following one
of the UFO incidents (he's confirmed which) seems at odds with
what was understood. He states:

"When I came in the next morning, all I saw was a lot of our
staff in uniform and in civilian dress, posted about the weapons
storage area, and everyone being told to not ask questions, just
do our jobs. To me it appeared to be no more than a regular
training or alert drill after which there is normally a higher
level of visible security at the twin bases anyway".

"As to the normal day to day operations training, alerts,
exercises, and such it was common practice to have senior SPS
personnel attempt to breach security of the WSA. These exercises
often resulted in supplemental staff being brought in from the
barracks to protect the area. That would account for SPS staff
in civilian cloths posted in the WSA. Again I was not there the
night of the incident, however, the morning after, staff in the
WSA were still in a heightened state of alert, IE more personnel
in the WSA than normal. Why?? Who knows".

"I also remember being on alert for the Poland Issue at
Christmas time and the alert status with [the] Poland situation
would not have brought out the extra manning as we discussed".

So, what did?

If he's correct about the dating, then any alert next morning
might not have involved the 'night-shift' - who worked from 11
p.m. - 7 a.m. Perhaps that could explain why Sgt Smith and
others were unaware of any 'alarm' being exhibited.


Anyway, all being pursued and this hopefully explains the
background to why RAF Bentwaters and its WSA have been
implicated - potentially the most significant aspect of events.


James Easton

E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                 Re: WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 05:44:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:42:53 -0400
Subject: Re: WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus - McCoy


Hello, all.


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: WorldNetDaily - Greer's Circus
 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 05:42:22 -0700


 >Hello, all (sigh)

 >The Klowns are now in the center ring - this is one of
 >(unfortunately) many links to the briefing. I also saw a bit on
 >CNN, MSNBC, and of course, ABC.

 >abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/ufo010509.html

 >I fear to the serious folks, of all stripes this is a disaster.


Well, after further investigation at other sites and seeing what
really went down, I feel better, but I still don't trust Greer
and Co. I feel we shoudn't let our guard down with him - ever.
Nothing really new, I feel, was added, I am taken aback by some
of the neutral press reports that is new.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:44:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:44:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Easton


There's an online article (I note also a link to my web site) at:

http://www.now.com/feature.now?fid=1657093&cid=21213&javascript=dhtml


James Easton

E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:12:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:47:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -



 >Date: 11 May 2001 05:53:53 -0700
 >To: Bill Hamilton <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: skywatcher22@space.com
 >Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - Bogus!

 >On Fri, 11 May 2001, UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:

 >>Source: Rense.com

 >>Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

 >>From Bill Hamilton
 >>Skywatch International

 >>5-10-1

 >>I am told there was an earlier effort at disclosure on a
 >>controlled release basis termed "Operation White". Here is a
 >>startling finding that needs to be seriously considered:

 >>Bill H

 >This was bundled in with a factual report on the Disclosure
 >Press conference and I posted it without really examining where
 >it came from... I apologize. It is a bogus story. I have
 >reposted my finding on Skywatch.

 >I searched and searched to find out where this story came from
 >originally because I could find no evidence of a professor
 >Merrick.

 >Here is the original unreliable source of this story:

 >Weekly World News newspaper (Canada) Date: April 30th, 1996.

 >JFK WAS SHOT TO PREVENT HIM FROM REVEALING TRUTH ABOUT UFOs!

 >A newspaper notorious for printing bogus stories.

 >Somehow the JFK urban legends are getting cross-filed with UFO
 >urban legends!


Hello Bill & all,

My old DC-7 was on the cover of the Weekly World News back in
92'  - as a "Airliner full of Skeletons found intact, from the
1950's!">It was from a picture of Redmond, Or. Airtanker Base.
circa 1988. They didn't bother airbrushing out the retardant
tank.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                             Greer'S Ironic Fate

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:09:41 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:49:43 -0400
Subject: Greer'S Ironic Fate


While reading Kevin Randle's dissection of Sgt. Clifford Stone
and his wild claims in today's posts, it suddenly occurred to me
that Greer will be hoisted by his own petard. That is, the con
man will be done in by the con men whom he believed. Isn't that
ironic?

Kevin's predictions are very likely to come true. If
Congressional hearings were to be attempted (which I frankly
doubt will result from this charade), the first thing the staff
investigators would do is check on the witnesses, and when they
start finding frauds they would quickly lose interest.

Some people seem to be cheered by the fact that some national
and international publicity resulted. Just wait until someone
starts digging a little deeper, if they bother at all. Instead,
the most likely result is the standard 24-hour wonder.

This is too bad, because some of the witnesses are quite genuine
and their reports deserve to be heard. I suggest they ditch
Greer and go elsewhere very quickly if they wish to save their
reputations. Otherwise, they are likely to be tarred with the
same brush.

Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                     Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:33:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:51:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:31:32 EDT
 >Subject: Greer Press Conference
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >This then is the source of my anger. The real point is if this
 >is the caliber of Greer's insiders, then they will be exposed
 >quickly. It's just as obvious that Greer and his team do not
 >bother to investigate the claims being made. When they are
 >exposed, we all look as if we have no powers of discrimination
 >and that we all believe these tales. This is what happens to us
 >every time we begin to make some progress. People leap on the
 >bandwagon and we are all tarred with the same brush when these
 >tales collapse as they always do.

I sat down with my sister... a school teacher who has no
interest in UFOs at all... and got her to watch the entire Greer
and Co. press conference. When it was done, her reaction was a
very puzzled, "Wow. Is that stuff really true?" I then told her
what I had read about Clifford Stone. I told her that I didn't
know about the rest of the group, but this is what I had read
regarding Stone's record of veracity on the subject.

Her reply was, "That's a shame. All those grown men up there
lying like that. They should be ashamed." And she totally
dismissed the entire subject as bogus.

Guilt by association. I know there are ufologists out there who
don't agree with my statements along that line, but that is the
way it is in "real life" among us John Q. Consumer Pubic types.
Ufology is as credible, or not, as the company it keeps.

I think you're right, Kevin. In this instance, everyone is going
to probably end up tarred, and possibly even feathered, with the
same brush.


My two cents

Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                   Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Young

From: YoungBob2@aol.com
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 11:21:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:53:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Young


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 21:24:09 EDT
 >Subject: Contest For The Best Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >The Canal Street UFO Illogical Society and Discount House of
 >Freshly Made Wine, Cheese and Publishing presents:

 >A contest.

<snip>

 >RULES:

 >There are very few. Just write an amusing or satirical piece of
 >a thousand words or more. Subject matter should include UFOs
 >and we would love to see a biting piece on the subject of UFO
 >researchers and how they may be punished for their crimes
 >against humanity. Ours.

My submission is that all serious UFO researchers should be
required to read the entire transcript of the recent Cosmic
Press Conference of Steven Greer and Friends, better known as
Snow White and his Twenty Dwarfs. This will be punishment
enough.

And the Gods will laugh.

While this does not meet the technical specifications of the
contest, to make be write 954 more words on this subject would
amount to inhuman punishment.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:43:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:54:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200


 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:14:06 -0700

 >>>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:59:59 -0400


 >>>In his book, Corso takes credit for making the Kennedy
 >>>administration do something about the presence of Soviet
 >>>missiles in Cuba.

 >>Yes, he does say that: pgs. 253-257. But this is a very
 >>complicated story.

 >>There is no reason that I can see that this bit of information
 >>would harm Col. Corso's reliability. Do you have the book at
 >>your side? What is your take on this section of the book?

 >>>There's no basis whatsoever for this in the historical record.
 >>>It's especially revealing to read the verbatim transcripts of
 >>>White House discussions before, during, and after the Cuban
 >>>Missle crisis. If Corso had blown the whistle, and forced JFK to
 >>>act, don't you think his name would have come up rather
 >>>prominently? Needless to say, it doesn't.

 >It was more the _way_ he did it, Greg...very surreptitiously

 >>Of course it wouldn't. He was a confidential source. He was
 >>unknown to those outside of the power center.

 >It looks like there are three groups, "the Puppets", "the
 >Puppeteers" and "the Puppet Masters"... the latter we don't hear
 >anything about, and thats the way they like it I would guess


I suggest a fourth group: the Bullshitters. Or a fifth: the
Megalomaniacs. Corso had more than enough credentials to be a
member in good standing of both.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

               Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:21:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:56:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Hale


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

<snip>

 >This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
 >already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
 >by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
 >needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
 >meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
 >they are.


Hi,

I would like to disagree entirely with the above statement.
Journalists worth their money, can and do find out heaps of
information from the smallest piece of information, whether this
be a photo, letter, etc.

What usually makes the headlines is the writers fears on
removing himself from the bubble of 9 to 5, alongside the shadow
of an over-bearing editor in chief! So for now I guess we can
look forward to more gracious ridicule.

I also find it staggering that someone can write on this list
the above, after how many years of culminated World UFO
research.

Perhaps Steven needs some superb Scottish Highland meat to get
his ball rolling!

Moo.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:22:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:00:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"


 >Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"
 >To: UfoUpdates <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >The Cydonian Imperative
 >5-11-01

 >An Independent Look at Tom Van Flandern's "Crowned
 >Face"

 >by Mac Tonnies

 >Although I find the Crowned Face more and more interesting upon
 >repeated viewing, my initial reaction--that this is probably, if
 >not certainly, a natural formation--remains largely unchanged.
 >But deciding what Martian "faces" are worth investigation and
 >which aren't unleashes an epistemological nightmare. Who are any
 >of us to judge a given anomaly? After all, we're all
 >"terrestrially biased," whether we want to admit it or not. If
 >certain features on Mars are actually artificial, then we know
 >essentially nothing about the civilization that built them (such
 >as why there is a human face in Cydonia).


Hi,

Flandern was interviewed on Talk Sport Radio here in the UK last
night. For a recording of the interview check their site:

http://www.talksport.net

look for the James Whale Show.

He did say that these were indeed artificially made structures
which have big implications for us on Earth.

He also mentioned that NASA has been very quiet on these
pictures, due to the fact that they are split down the middle on
them. And that if NASA came out and backed these pictures, some
contractors with them wouldn't be too happy. He particularly
mentioned those dealing with propulsion systems?


Regards,

Roy









                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                       Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:23:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:02:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 18:45:53 +0100

 >As you all know I wasn't really working for the Sheffield Star
 >at all, but doing my master's bidding.
 >When MFI offered me a better job, I thought I'd take it.


Dave,

It was weird really, after those years on the Star, you chose
the Max Burns sentencing to leave? As you said at the time,
your job is done here!

 >That's what you wanted to hear wasn't it?

You proved me right Dave, what star system did you say you
were from!

 >As for my stance - that hasn't changed at all.

A loyal advocate - read on!





                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                         Project Disclosure & Greer

From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:06:34 -0400
Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer


My Look at Project Disclosure

by Don Ecker
Director of Research
UFO Magazine

Allow me to set the record straight at the beginning. I want
"world peace!" I cry inside when I hear about some Palestinian
baby killed by Israeli shells, or a couple of 13- or 14-year-old
kids bashed to death by Palestinian rocks in revenge. I no
longer want to listen to news stories about some maladjusted
mutant robbing a "Mom and Pop" grocery store and then gunning
down the owners in a hail of bullets just to watch them die. I
don't care if I hear another story in this life about some
14-year-old malcontent shooting up his or her school because
they are pissed off about the very last F they received in
English Lit, so lets go gun down a dozen classmates and the
teacher that flunked them. I would just love it, to paraphrase
Rodney King, "if we could all just get along!" Then I wake up
and look at the world that we all happen to live in.

You want to know why I hate, despise and loath war? I been in
one. Oh yeah, my very own little war in a place called Viet Nam.
I saw it very close up, close enough to watch some very dear
friends die and me almost die when I was shot up and wounded.
So, to take a point from the 1960's, "War is detrimental to
flowers and other living things."

I wanted to be in Washington ,D.C. on May 9, 2001. Usually I try
to avoid the place like I would the plague, but the Washington
D.C. Press Club was holding the Disclosure Project press
conference headed up by Dr. Steven Greer. In attendance were
close to 20 men and women who promised to disclose long-held
secret information to the public and press about UFOs. I
couldn't be there, but UFO Magazine did have a correspondent in
attendance. BUT! because of the miracle of the computer age we
live in, I was able to watch the entire program via the
internet. Great, I looked forward with anticipation.

The morning of May 10, I received a call from a close friend of
mine telling me that he had just finished watching the program,
and was anxious for me to view it so we could discuss this. I
promised to call once I finished and digested what I was about
to see. Instead, here I am writing this opinion piece. I think
you may understand in a moment.

Close to 10 years ago I and my wife, editor of UFO Magazine, met
Dr. Steve Greer for the first time. Greer was just becoming
active in UFOs, was in So. California, and called us up to have
lunch. We must not have hit it off because that was "my" last
contact with him, though not my last contact with his group
CSETI. You see, at the start Greer laid out his feelings that
all UFOs and ETs had to be good - no hostility or "evil intent"
anywhere visible in his worldview. I maintained - rather
forcefully, in retrospect - that we just didn't have enough
information yet to make that judgement. If I recall correctly, I
believe I said something to the effect of, "You know, Steve,
friends don't come calling at 4 a.m., abduct you out of bed,
carry you off and do things to you (invasive things to your
body) then carry you back where you are unceremoniously dumped
back into bed with nary a word of explanation!" I think (if I
remember correctly) he answered that with the analogy of a
trauma doctor working on a child hurt in a accident, where the
child may not know why the doctor is doing the hurtful things he
is to save the kid's life. Yeah, well that may be true for a
child hurt in a traffic accident, but that still does not have a
damned thing to do with abductions and the hundreds of people I
have interfaced with over the years who just wish that it would
QUIT! Whatever IT is.

Over the years, I have watched , sometimes with great amusement
,some of the antics of CSETI: Taking groups of people out into
the country, flashing lights into the sky, "wishing" ET to drop
down and land so they can all go for a ride. Greer passing out
boarding numbers for the would-be interstellar travelers and the
folks, many of whom walked away disillusioned, claiming that it
seemed Greer was too tied up in his ego and the "insiders" that
he claimed to know. Me? I don't know, I wasn't there, and like I
said, Greer and I have not talked in years. However, I have
heard him speak any number of times and found some of his
assertions way, way over the edge. You may wonder what I mean,
and to answer that I just have to recount one time when Greer
stated that the President of the United States was out of the
UFO loop, but he himself (Dr. Steven Greer) was in the loop.

I digress.

I booted my system and went to the Disclosure website. I knew
quite a few of the speakers, but not all of them. As it turned
out, the very last speaker caused my blood pressure to jump. I
had a hard time believing what I heard, because, quite frankly,
I was pretty impressed until this speaker took the podium. Her
name is Carol Rosin and her background involves having been a
sixth grade teacher until she met Dr. Werner Von Braun. If you
don't know who Von Braun is, I suggest you do a web search. He
is often credited with "almost" single-handedly getting Apollo
to the Moon. Less often mentioned is that he hand delivered to
Adolph Hitler the German V-2 rocket program that killed
thousands of British citizens during the Second World War. Von
Braun certainly knew a lot about war, and did I mention slavery?
Oh yes, another unsavory fact about the good doctor concerns the
thousands of Jews and others that slaved in the German rocket
program headed up by Von Braun. This is not often mentioned, so
I thought I would. And oh. yes, the fact that I have Von Braun
recorded on audiotape answering a question about UFOs. When
asked in the early 1960s what he thought about them, Von Braun
answered by stating that the only ones he knew about were the
ones his wife threw when she got really mad! Another case of
scientific honesty.

I digress again. Back to Carol Rosin. For a minute or two I
listened to her waxing almost poetically about Von Braun, and
then something ran through my mind like a chant: . . . "useful
idiot" ........ "useful idiot" ........... "useful idiot." The
connection with some other useful idiots exploded in my memory
from when I was still in Viet Nam. As a matter of fact, they
were in Viet Nam too, North Viet Nam. Their names were Tom
Hayden and Jane Fonda. While the North Vietnamese were routinely
torturing and in some cases murdering American prisoners of war,
Hayden and Fonda were marching to the North Vietnamese song and
dance that it was them the North Vietnamese - who were the
victims. All they wished for was for the Vietnamese people to
have the choice of which government to lead them. Either their
brand of government or the one that the "Running Dog Imperialist
American Capitalistic Wall Street War Mongers" were impressing
on their puppets in the South. And NO! We don't torture anybody,
the Capitalistic War Mongers do that! I digress again . . . !

According to Carol Rosin, Von Braun warned her 25 years ago that
the government would seek to militarize space using such excuses
as the need for missile defense, asteroid defense, satellite
defense and finally - defending us from ET! Oh my! I stopped the
flow of the program several times to digest what she was saying.
I thought back several years ago to when Colonel Phil Corso's
book "The Day After Roswell" came out claiming that ET defense
was one military concern that Corso knew about. I also
remembered the flak Corso took about that. Evil ETs? Not
according to Greer and company. Evil Russians 25 years ago? Not
according to the left of center in this country. But, then, how
many of those "useful idiots" knew about the soon-to-happen
invasion of Afghanistan? How many knew about the Korean civilian
airliner soon to be shot down? As a matter of fact, with history
being what it is, who knew that Ol' Joe Stalin murdered more
people than Adolph Hitler ever dreamed of a decade before World
War Two? Ask any Pole or Hungarian or Austrian what they thought
about the Soviet Union. Well, anyone who lived through it of
course.


My point is this: Hell, yes, they were evil and we were correct
in being prepared to fight them, God forbid, had it been
necessary. Today, of course, the world is more dangerous than
ever. Why? For one thing, during the last administration the
Communist Chinese garnered more intelligence and nuclear secrets
from sloppy handling and American traitors than they could have
developed themselves in 25 or 30 years. Rogue states like North
Korea, Iraq, Iran and God knows who else, either have or will
soon have atomic weapons. Should we be prepared to defend this
nation with a missile shield or defend our military and civilian
satellites, if need be? Your damned right we should. Just let
ONE nuclear-tipped missile launch and hit anywhere in the United
States and then watch it all fall apart.

Want another example?

Summer, 2001 in Southern California. Rolling energy blackouts.
Without warning, the failure of the electrical grid causes power
to go out and for hours at a time there is no electricity to be
had. Southern California, baby the land of the automobile. No
traffic lights. You just AIN"T lived until you are driving in
downtown L.A. and the lights go out. An experience not soon to
be forgotten. And why, in the 21st century, in the most
technologically oriented spot on the globe, do we not have
enough power? Not to mention gasoline skyrocketing to three
bucks a gallon. The environment, baby! Oh yeah, we can't build
anymore power plants, especially nuclear plants because we might
impact the snail darter fish or some damn thing. We can't drill
for oil because oil isn't good for the environment if it leaks
out. Let's just keep buying from all those nice people in the
Middle East who then can have a stranglehold on our national
interest. If we play nice, MAYBE they will, too! Well, let me
answer that one for you. I learned this 30 years ago from a
nasty old Army sergeant: "When you grab them by the balls,
sweetheart, their hearts and minds will follow." By now you must
be wondering what in hell this has to do with Carol Rosin? Fair
question.

Today it is believed that there were AT LEAST five or so major
extinction events on Planet Earth. Big and nasty rocks from the
sky fell on Earth and completely reshaped it, killing most
everything alive when doing so. We all know about the mass
extinction 65 million years ago which opened up the road for us
mammals to take over from the reptiles. Well, Ms. Rosin, what if
we suddenly discovered this was going to happen again in, oh
let's say, 25 or 30 years? Or what about 5 or 10 years, or what
about next year? Would you like a nice, new defensive space
weapons system? We discover Near Earth Objects all the time, and
so far we have been lucky. I was very lucky in Viet Nam right up
to the point that I wasn't. But, hey that is small potatoes.
What if suddenly North Korea got a REAL WILD HAIR up their ass
and decided, what the hell they don't much care for us anyway,
but then neither does Saddam. And none of them like Israel. What
happens if somebody decides to make Israel glow in the dark? You
would be very naive to think that we could stay out of it. As a
matter of fact, I am positive that one or more of our
intelligence services would have advance knowledge of such an
event. I will not say how, but they are a lot more "with it"
than people like Rosin will acknowledge.

But, then, there IS the ET angle, the last but least likely
reason for weapons in space. Granted, this is the tough one.
Greer maintains that for over 50 years there has been no
world-wide ET attack, and that is true. But before our entry
into World War Two because of Pearl Harbor, there were no major
battles but there sure as hell was a lot of shooting. Ever hear
of the USS Panay? Did you know we were depth charging German
subs before December 7, 1941? Did you know we had military
pilots flying under the Chinese flag killing Japanese pilots in
China? My point is there were many skirmishes, just like there
have been many skirmishes with UFOs. Not all of these encounters
were hostile, of course, but we have learned in 50 years that it
is often fatal to tangle with them.Yet if you believe some of
the stories I have worked on, we have proved to be a force to
reckon with also.

To enjoy peace one must be prepared for war. Not a pleasant
thought, to be sure, but a true one, nonetheless. And I have
found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like





                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:02:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:09:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Stacy


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 20:10:12 -0400

<snip>

 >Before you hang yourself with a G flat piano chord, it would be
 >_really_ nice of you to take part in this debate and, _finally_,
 >try your best to address the questions asked by the real
 >debunkers and the real skeptics.

 >If I didn't know better, I'd bet you can't take the heat and
 >you are looking for a hole to hide in.

 >As a matter of fact, your whole post sounds, pardon the
 >expression, like the whining of an impotent about pornography:
 >"I can't have sex! Look! Porn is so bad!"

 >Your "Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking"
 >did send shivers along my spine.

 >Will this be your last excuse to avoid the debate?


Serge,

While looking for my shovel (that's a sort of UFO-shaped thingie
on the end of a pole, isn't it), what on earth are you talking
about?

If Greer is your guy, go for it! Dig that deep hole with both
hands, if that's what you want.

If Leir and his latest Roswell debris is your guy, go for it,
although the latest scrap of same has already been revealed to
be terrestrial in nature, by Whitley Strieber, no less.

If the so-called MJ-12 stuff the Woods duo is releasing is also
up your alley, go for that, too. It's a free country, last time
I looked.

If you think the UFO water is free of contaminants, then, by all
means, drink as much as you want, or can hold.

Like Bartleby, I prefer not to at this time, not from the above
glasses, anyway.

Now, do you have something specific to say that I, or anyone
else on this List can make sense of? And remember: no excuses
this time.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 11

              Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez

From: John  Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:04:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:28:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

 >>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >>handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >>excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >>listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >>responsibly.


Hiya Steve, All,

You wrote:

 >John,

 >From a technical perspective, I think it went as well as they
 >could have expected. But did it make any points that the press
 >could take aware with them and build on?

As I said in my original, with the exception of a 'couple'
(maybe three) of the witnesses presented, they were 'overall' a
pretty credible group of individuals. The press is now in
possession of names, ranks, dates, and places. With the
investigative resources that some journalists enjoy, there's no
reason why they can't sink their teeth into the material offered
and simply 'report' the results of their own investigations.
(Into the credibility or veracity of the witnesses or their
claims/statements.)

Kevin Randle has already yanked the 'covers' off of one of them.
I'm certain the press will uncover a couple more. I still think
that there will be 'enough' credible people left standing after
the dust settles to justify pursuing public hearings.

 >This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
 >already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
 >by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
 >needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
 >meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
 >they are.

There was 500+ pages of documentation that accompanied the
"live" presentation. I believe that the attending members of the
press were provided 'hard copies' of all the briefing material.

 >I'm not sure they're getting the type of coverage they were
 >hoping for.

That, my friend was a forgone conclusion! There is little or no
serious coverage of the UFO subject in the "news" media under
ordinary circumstances. Why would this be treated any
differently?

It's all just 'par for the course' man!


Regards,

John Velez
Watching the proceedings from a catbird seat! ;)


                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 12:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:03:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned Face"


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:22:14 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Cydonian Imperative: 5-11-01 - "Crowned
 >Face"

<snip>

 >He did say that these were indeed artificially made structures
 >which have big implications for us on Earth.

 >He also mentioned that NASA has been very quiet on these
 >pictures, due to the fact that they are split down the middle on
 >them. And that if NASA came out and backed these pictures, some
 >contractors with them wouldn't be too happy. He particularly
 >mentioned those dealing with propulsion systems?

Malin Space Science Systems is, of course, one of the most
skeptical organizations involved with Mars exploration.
Nevertheless, they enjoy reading my site. I got this hit a few
minutes ago:

maling3.msss.com

Who knows what they think? I wouldn't be at all surprised if
there are some _individuals_ who are interested. I wish I knew
TVF's sources...


=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) 816-561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112
http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:25:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:10:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:09:15 -0500

 >>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

 >>>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

Hola Alfredo,

I wrote:

 >>>Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >>>handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >>>excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >>>listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >>>responsibly.

You responded:

 >Good for you, Johnny me lad! Your stock _seldom_ fails to go up
 >with me! <g>.

We at E.T. Dynatech would like to thank you for your investment
in our corporation. (BTW, Millie in accounting informs me that
we haven't received your check yet! Margin call!!!)  <LOL>


 >This is forgetting the older gentleman with the
 >string tie that I thought was going to start yodeling during his
 >segment (he was _still_ credible),

Yeah! I still can't figure out if that guy was laughing or
crying. <LOL>But yes, I agree. He 'sounded' credible
nonetheless.

 >and "Chief Daniels" almost breaking into his "Man of La Manche"
 >medley. I wanted to put a bullet in him. <g>.

<LOL>Yes, I too was awaiting a "medley" to come streaming out of
him. What was he doing there anyway? They should have gotten Dan
Ackroyd if they need to have that spot filled by someone in the
entertainment industry who at least has some genuine interest
in, and connection to the subject of UFOs. I couldn't figure out
what that cat was doing there either. You're not alone.  ;)

 >Most of the panel members were _striking_

Yes. They were. But... please don't lose sight of the fact that
Greer has included some "questionable" people with the more
credible ones. The surest way of getting the credible ones
dismissed by the public is to lump them in with a sprinkling of
a few well chosen wahoos. Which, for all intents and purposes is
what Dr. Greer has done here. By adding the 'bad apples' to the
barrel he endangers the lot. I'd hate to think that Greer set
all this up, and -used- all those people just to sell some books
and videotapes. Based on his past performance, I wouldn't put a
stunt like that past him. In spite of the quality of some of the
witnesses, there is no reason to let our guard down (for a
second) with Greer.

 >- raised the hair on the back of MY neck...

Mine too.

Maybe "disclosure" will happen within our lifetimes Alfred. Ghod
I hope so anyway. It would be sooo very nice to know just what
the phuque is going on. And maybe 'why.' However, I don't fool
myself into thinking that we're going to get it from this 'side
show' that Greer has put on. I still say that he'll end up
having done much more harm than good after all is said and done.

I'm not going to let that stop me from participating in efforts
to get open public hearings though.  "Greer" has nothing to do
with that. That, is about "us" the peeps!  ;)


Warmest regards,

John Velez
CEO E.T. Dynatech International


                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                     Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:07:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:17:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Lehmberg


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Greer'S Ironic Fate
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:09:41 -0000

 >While reading Kevin Randle's dissection of Sgt. Clifford Stone
 >and his wild claims in today's posts, it suddenly occurred to me
 >that Greer will be hoisted by his own petard. That is, the con
 >man will be done in by the con men whom he believed. Isn't that
 >ironic?

Only if irony provides for a frustration abscessed in every
regard. I detect a little more mirth in your observation than is
appropriate given the gravity of the situation. It's like you're
cocked and ready with an exuberant I told you so... providing
for a self-fulfilling prophesy tragic in every regard.

 >Kevin's predictions are very likely to come true. If
 >Congressional hearings were to be attempted (which I frankly
 >doubt will result from this charade), the first thing the staff
 >investigators would do is check on the witnesses, and when they
 >start finding frauds they would quickly lose interest.

Yep! Looking for _every_ excuse to discredit the macrocosm
they'll seize upon the tiniest excuse provided in the
microcosm... gleefully evacuating their flimsy men of straw
through stuttering posteriors while the relieved masses breath a
collective sigh of relief that their 'investments' in the
'future' have a few more months grace, and they can put off
paying the piper for just a little longer...

 >Some people seem to be cheered by the fact that some national
 >and international publicity resulted. Just wait until someone
 >starts digging a little deeper, if they bother at all. Instead,
 >the most likely result is the standard 24-hour wonder.

Then it can fall back on the intrepid shoulders of those content
to live in an equal fantasy of 'data', 'measurement', and the
'work of real science', when the object of your affection is
controlled by the same corporate interests that control the
media reporting it (and the politician hearing it) and will
allow you NO acknowledgement regardless of your validity, your
scholarship, or your strict adherence to a scientific method...
Hasn't that been made painfully obvious in the 50 years of YOUR
honorable experience? You know -- we better satisfy ourselves
with these twenty-four hour wonders... they're likely all we're
gonna get, and if enough of them stack up they might even amount
to something. "Chief Danials" made the point eloquently -- just
one of those reports has to be true, and some of that truth is
as hard as diamonds!

 >This is too bad, because some of the witnesses are quite genuine
 >and their reports deserve to be heard. I suggest they ditch
 >Greer and go elsewhere very quickly if they wish to save their
 >reputations. Otherwise, they are likely to be tarred with the
 >same brush.

Then I suggest you put out the call for a proactive effort of
your own, otherwise support the proactive stance as it presents
itself. We all know there is something out there, anybody with
rationality and two stem cells to rub together knows it...
that's what it's all about. Say what you want about Greer, but
support the aggregate effort. This is like condemning all poets
because Emerson was a pedophile. Be not too cheered in your own
right.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by scurrilous
skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                   Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:22:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:20:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Velez


 >From: YoungBob2@aol.com
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 11:21:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Contest For The Best Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 21:24:09 EDT
 >>Subject: Contest For The Best Piece
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>The Canal Street UFO Illogical Society and Discount House of
 >>Freshly Made Wine, Cheese and Publishing presents:

 >>A contest.

 ><snip>

 >>RULES:

 >>There are very few. Just write an amusing or satirical piece of
 >>a thousand words or more. Subject matter should include UFOs
 >>and we would love to see a biting piece on the subject of UFO
 >>researchers and how they may be punished for their crimes
 >>against humanity. Ours.

 >My submission is that all serious UFO researchers should be
 >required to read the entire transcript of the recent Cosmic
 >Press Conference of Steven Greer and Friends, better known as
 >Snow White and his Twenty Dwarfs. This will be punishment
 >enough.

Some of those "dwarves" you are ridiculing are former members
of our armed services. Several were pilots. They deserve a fair
public hearing. We don't agree on very much stuff Bob but, I like
to think of you as an honest, thoughtful person. This completely
dismissive comment from you about -all- of the witnesses is unfair,
very close-minded, and beneath you. I don't like it when folks
lump me in with 'all other abductees.' I am not "all abductees," I'm
sure you don't likeit when people lump you in with 'all' sceptics or
debunkers. So what are you doing here by ridiculing and lumping all
these folks together? Sounds like, 'shoot em all now and take names
later.' What's up?

Disagreeing with people is one thing, summarily dismissing them
without any investigation or hearing is quite another. I'm a little
surprised at you man. If it was intended to be 'funny' it wasn't.
I'm out here busting my ass telling people to get serious about
this and you 'make jokes.' Gets me by the ya-ya's when it is
coming from someone I genuinely like and respect. We have to
get you some pizza and beer man. You're sounding a little 'tight.'

 >And the Gods will laugh.

Yeah I heard that one! And "He who laughs last, laughs best!"
That's another 'good one!'  ;)

Fair is fair Bob. You cannot simply joke about and dismiss the
testimony of all those people without checking it out first.
That's _basic_. Let's (at the very least) try to keep our
conversations about these people and their testimony open and
intelligent. Performing a blanket dismissal by referring to them
right out of the box as "Snow White's dwarves" is not a good way
to start.


Regards,

John Velez

                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                          Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:47:35 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:22:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Hatch


 >From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer On Bell
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 10:39:29 -0400

 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 10:33:27 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer On Bell - Kaeser

 >Previously, I had written:

 >>>I requested an invitation for myself and the Chairman of the
 >>>Fund for UFO Research, but we were told that the briefing on
 >>>Wednesday was only for current members of the working press, and
 >>>that request was denied. I was advised that if I could get a
 >>>Member of Congress to attend the VIP Luncheon (I just happen to
 >>>work at the U.S. House), I could tag along.

<snip>


 >To which, Larry responded:

 >>Do I perceive an unwelcome mat for the more serious UFO groups
 >>and individuals... i.e. those who might view these matters with
 >>some degree of healthy skepticism?

 >This isn't the reason given, and I'll have to take their
 >statements on face value. However, I made the request
 >understanding that Greer and the FUND have had their own ethical
 >and legal difficulties in the past, so the the rejection wasn't
 >a complete surprise.

 >Several years ago Dr. Greer brought a group to Washington and
 >held a series of closed briefings that were ostensibly for
 >Members of Congress and other high level Government officials.
 >Since I work at the U.S. House, and had been in routine contact
 >with (the late) Congressman Steven Schiff's staff, I was
 >interested in finding out who had actually attended these
 >meetings. I was also somewhat surprised that such a major series
 >of meetings were being held in a complete publicity vacuum.

 >In the end, the only description of how those sessions went came
 >from Dr. Greer's group. I was able to locate only one person
 >from the U.S. House who had actually attended any of the
 >meetings. This person was a staffer who had gone to the meeting
 >on her own time, and she emphasized to me that she was not
 >representing the office. She may not have been the only person
 >to attend from the U.S. House, but somehow this didn't seem to
 >jive with the success story being touted elsewhere.

 >I had written:

 >>>From what I can see on the local front, this is a non-event as
 >>>far as the public is concerned. There has been no publicity
 >>>about it, except for the mentions we've seen on the Internet. If
 >>>there's any hope of getting the public to the event on Saturday,
 >>>then it will have to come from the massive publicity expected to
 >>>result from the "disclosures" on Wednesday. Unfortunately, the
 >>>press in DC isn't very sympathetic to the subject of UFOs, and
 >>>getting good publicity is going to be tough.

 >To which, Larry commented:

 >>Well, the Art Bell show performance should have provided plenty
 >>of publicity. The Bell audience seems highly receptive to
 >>extraordinary claims, they might ultimately be a major source of
 >>funding as well.

 >As I understand it, a marketting expert has been retained to
 >promote the Disclosure Briefing events, and the primary focus
 >was to get members of the Press to the Briefing on Wednesday.

A Marketing Expert! -LH

 >I believe these were going to be personal invitations, so they
 >would have a good idea of who and how many to expect. This
 >session is reportedly for current members of the Press, and a
 >few VIPs. With the growth of cable news channels, I suspect that
 >one or two television cameras will be in attendance to document
 >the event and if it's a slow news day we may see bits and pieces
 >of the event appearing on cable news channels for about 24 hours
 >after the Briefing. But if there isn't a "smoking gun" to latch
 >onto, most reports will probably be about the personalities in
 >the genre rather than focus on the subject matter.

 >The Art Bell exposure may result in a few people driving to
 >Washington for the Saturday briefing, but this region has a
 >group of about 75 to 100 people who show up at local events and
 >it's been difficult to attract a larger audiance than that. I'm
 >not convinced that a large number of people will drive to DC for
 >this event, but I could be wrong.

 >Steve

Re: Art Bell, I should have been more clear. What I meant was
that the Bell show would drive more people to the Greer web
pages, and to fund-raising and plate passing which might help
finance the Greer disclosure project.

Thank you very much for the additional details. I have an even
better estimate of the Greer program as a result.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 03:37:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:25:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -


 >Source: Rense.com
 >Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

 >From Bill Hamilton
 >Skywatch International

 >5-10-1

 >I am told there was an earlier effort at disclosure on a
 >controlled release basis termed "Operation White". Here is a
 >startling finding that needs to be seriously considered:

 >Bill H

 >JFK Was Shot To Prevent Him From Revealing The Truth About ETs
 >And UFOs

 >"Citizens of this Earth, we are not alone."

 >With those dramatic words, President John F. Kennedy intended to
 >inform the American public and the world at large that the U.S.
 >government had made contact with aliens from deep space.

 >But before he could deliver the speech on November 22, 1963, the
 >beloved leader was cut down by an assassin's bullets.

 >That is the astonishing claim of JFK researcher Professor
 >Lawrence Merrick, author of an upcoming blockbuster book Killing
 >the Messenger: The Death of JFK.

 >"We now know the real reason why President Kennedy was
 >assassinated," declared Prof. Merrick of Cambridge, Mass.

<snip>


Hello Bill, all:

This sounded so much like tabloid stuff that I did a browse for
the name (professor) Lawrence Merck.

Sure enough, the very same story appeared in 1996 in the
Canadian edition (at least) of the indefatigable Weekly World
News. Click on:

  http://www.ufoinfo.com/ukufon/50.html

.. to see the same story ..

  From: Weekly World News newspaper (Canada)
  Date: April 30th, 1996.

  JFK SHOT TO PREVENT HIM FROM REVEALING TRUTH ABOUT UFOs!

  News exclusive: The Shocking Reason President Kennedy Was
  Assassinated!

  By Mike Foster

  "Citizens of this Earth, we are not alone." With those dramatic
  words, President John F. Kennedy intended to inform the
  American public and the world that the U.S. government had made
  contact with aliens from deep space. [ and so on.. ]

There was only one other relevant hit:

  http://www.ufoinfo.com/ukufon/108_3.shtml

.. a long page which contains this query:


  To: ufo@ukufonw.co.uk
  From: jill james [lonelorne5@excite.com]
  Subj: 5/4/96 ufo info
  Date sent: Sun, 7 May 2000 09:36:26 -0700 (PDT)

  To whom it may concern:

I was wondering if it would be possible to gather source
information regarding a "Professor... Lawrence Merrick" who is
referred to in issue 50, May 4, 1996, of your UFO publication in
the context of the JFK revelation of UFO information. Would it
be possible to reveal the University at which this professor
holds a position? This stems from the fact that despite
extensive searches, I can find no record of a tenured faculty
member by that name.

  Please let me know if you'll be able to help me in any
  manner.

  Thank you very much,

  Jill James

- - - - -

Lots of luck Jill. Maybe he is untenured, or teaching at some
college in Yellow Falls, Texas.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 01:21:16 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:28:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems - Bruni


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - Serious Problems
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:49:52 +0100>

Regarding:

 >>Having investigated the Rendlesham Forest case, there is no
 >>evidence that I am aware of that the UFOs penetrated the
 >>Bentwaters base...

 >Georgina,

 >The claim is attributed to Col. Halt and was first published in
 >'Left at East Gate', co-authored by Larry Warren and Peter
 >Robbins.

Yes, I am aware of that James.

 >A Bentwaters incursion was then seemingly described by Halt
 >during one of his 1998 interviews with Salley Rayl. The
 >incursion took place during the second night's events, when Halt
 >became involved and made his microcassette recording.

 >During 1998, Halt was interviewed by American journalist AJS
 >(Salley) Rayl and elaborated:

Was that published anywhere?

 >"Then it moved back toward Bentwaters and continued to send down
 >beams of light, at one point near the weapons storage facility.
 >We knew that, because we could hear the chatter on the radio".

I have a transcript of Rayl's interview with Halt, broadcast May
13, 1997, I believe. Here's what I have, no mention of
Bentwaters in that.

HALT:  "Well, we stood there in awe and watched and suddenly it
was like it was switched off. It just clicked. It was gone. The
object was still in the sky. We also noticed it receded. It
moved about. It sent down beams other places, included some
various places on the base. And we could hear chatter on the
radios. We were on three different radio nets two security
police nets and the command net and we could hear chatter. Other
people on the base were seeing these things, especially security
police.

Now, when I discussed this with Halt, on more than one occasion
I might add. He suggested it was the Woodbridge base. He only
heard chatter from Bentwaters but did not confirm that there
were any UFOs over there, only Woodbridge. I spoke to him again
just a couple of weeks ago about this very thing and he said
(regarding the beams) he was referring to Woodbridge. When I
asked about Bentwaters, he said he only heard chatter from
there. I have interviewed witnesses who were in that area and
they did not witness any UFOs over Bentwaters. So I think we can
conclude that Halt did not witness beams over Bentwaters.

 >Sgt Bobo is mentioned in Sgt Smith's account and they apparently
 >stood next to each other in the security tower watching 'UFOs'
 >that night.

I asked Bobo about Randy Smith, however, he positively insists
that nobody was with him in the tower. Only later did somebody
(not Smith) visit to check out the situation. I do not wish to
discredit Smith's testimony, all I can say is that Bobo in my
opinion, is a good stable witness, no frills, straight to the
point, wouldn't say anything that he wasn't sure of. Never
changed his story.

 >>Nice story, but who is Alabama?

 >He was Warren's room-mate - see 'Left at East Gate' pages 39-40.

Yes, I know Larry says that, but why no full name if he was a
friend?

 >For what it's worth, in 'Left at East Gate', Warren claims the
 >person who later committed suicide was "the guy next to me"
 >during that supposed 'UFO' debriefing. At no time does he name
 >him as Alabama, or indicate even knowing him.

You see the problem.

 >Leaving aside the issue of whether _anything_ in Warren's
 >various, differing accounts are reliable, there's no question
 >that the discussions between Warren, his co-author Peter Robbins
 >and Halt, recorded with Halt's permission, were invaluable
 >evidence and further insight.

 >The transcripts are published in 'Left at East Gate' and at some
 >points in the conversation, Halt asks for the tape to be stopped
 >as he wants to discuss confidential material.

 >He told us...

 >Light beams had penetrated the hardened bunkers of Bentwaters'
 >weapons-security area".

It is worth noting that during a lecture Larry and Peter did for
Anthony James, which is available on video, Larry states that
Halt told them during that interview that it was the
"Woodbridge" base that the beams hit. Not Bentwaters!

 >However, Sgt Randy Smith neither witnessed or ever heard about
 >'beams of light' coming down on base, let alone anywhere near
 >the WSA. Halt reportedly told Salley Rayl that between 30 to 40
 >people on base observed these 'beams'. Has anyone ever confirmed
 >witnessing this or even hearing talk of such an extraordinary
 >occurrence?

Nobody I talked to including those in the WSA saw the beams and
Tim Egercic was on duty there for three nights 26/27 27/28 28/29
Dec. Rick Bobo was actually in the tower and Egercic confirmed
this. I think Halt was not sure what was going on. Don't forget
he was out near Woodbridge and only heard the chatter. According
to the witnesses the UFOs were not visible from the WSA, except
the tower of course.

I met up with Larry last weekend and we went through some of his
claims. I told him to his face that I have problems with his
testimony  because it has changed so much. (but of course he
knows that) Larry believes what he's saying is correct. I must
add that although I have many problems with Larry's testimony, I
am not saying he was not involved somehow. But in what capacity,
I honestly do not know.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              UFO Claim Slips Away - Akron Report Not Verified

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:56:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:30:52 -0400
Subject: UFO Claim Slips Away - Akron Report Not Verified


UFO Claim Slips Away: Akron Beacon Journal Report Cannot Be Verified

SUMMATION

A hard-copy newspaper and on-line article noting a UFO sighting
appeared in the Sunday, May 6, 2001 Akron Beacon Journal. The
listing, appearing to originate from police blotter reports,
informs of a citizen complaint to an unspecified police
department on April 29 around 11:00 p.m. of a UFO hovering over
a residential area. Enclosed below is a copy of the entry:

April 29, PORTAGE COUNTY Police officers checked the skies over
the city at 11:06 p.m. April 29 after receiving a call that a
UFO was hovering over the community. The officers found nothing.

URL reference for this listing is also available at:
http://www.ohio.com/all/2001/May/06/newsdocs/001121.htm

In trying to gather more information on this case, the report by
the Akron Beacon Journal could not be independently confirmed.

INVESTIGATION

Regarding the report appearing in the May 6, 2001 Akron Beacon
Journal, the Akron Police Department was contacted
(330-375-2490) and they had no knowledge of the report and
suggested an inquiry be made with the Portage County Sheriff's
Department.

The Portage County Sheriff's Department was contacted
(330-296-5100) and they had no knowledge of the event and
suggested the call be referred to the Wayne County Sheriff's
Office.

The Wayne County Sheriff's Office was contacted (330-264-3333)
and the dispatcher informed that there was a report of a traffic
stop at 11:06 p.m. on April 29th, but no entry referencing a UFO
sighting. He advised that Chippawa Township was in the northeast
quadrant of the county, but suggested the call be deferred to
the Portage County police department, which was already
contacted earlier.

In frustration over inability to locate the origin of the report
and the lack of clarity in the newspaper article, a call was
made to the Akron Beacon Journal offices and several people were
questioned regarding this issue. The call was transferred around
to various departments and finally addressed by a writer on
staff at the Akron Beacon Journal (330-996-3899).

When contacted, (Thursday, May 10) the reporter was advised of
my efforts to verify the story told by the Akron Beacon Journal.
She could only recommend that I contact the Medina Police
Department for more information on the UFO report. She provided
the telephone number.

The Medina Police Department (330-725-7777) was then contacted
and the officer taking the call searched the logs but was unable
to find any reference to a UFO sighting on April 29 at 11:06
p.m.

The Akron Beacon Journal was contacted again and it was
explained to this staff person that something was amiss as the
Medina Police Department found no such entry in their logs. She
said that she would 'check into it' and return the phone call.

On Friday morning, May 11, Linda Golz of the Akron Beacon
Journal called to inform that she had researched the situation
to the best of her ability. She said that the editor assured her
the sighting was reported to the Medina City Police Department
at the office phone number she previously provided
(330-725-7777).

I repeated that Medina City Police Department denied any such
sighting reported to their headquarters.

Golz said she knew the reporter who turned in the notes (name on
file), and without any prompting she noted her certainty that
the report which had appeared in the Akron Beacon Journal
newspaper was not concocted. Golz also, without prompting,
volunteered her skepticism that any police logs would have been
modified or changed.

"I'm just not going to pursue this," the reporter informed, "so
good luck."

In response to the Golz's assurance, a second phone call was
placed to the Medina City Police Department and after explaining
that the Akron Beacon Journal insisted the report came from
their headquarters, the dispatcher (first name Connie) again
conducted a thorough review of computerized logs searching for
the UFO sighting. She searched the computerized logs under the
topics of 9-1-1, SUSPICIOUS and CITIZEN ASSIST categories for
the time frame of April 29 around 11:00 p.m. There was no 'UFO'
category in her computer to search under. Connie also searched
by chronological order and looked through every call from 1500
hours through midnight.

After hanging up with the Medina Police Department, I placed a
phone call back to the Akron Beacon Journal to speak with editor
Earl McDaniel at extension 330-996-3995. McDaniel, who was
advised that I was preparing an internet report on this issue
with the intent of confirming a UFO sighting reported by the
Akron Beacon Journal, had no explanation for the repeated
'non-confirmation' from the Medina City Police Department and
also assured that his reporter derived the information from this
same police office.

"We got it from the city," McDaniel assured, "so I don't know
why the city isn't showing the report."

When asked if any attempt by the Akron Beacon Journal would be
made to resolve this seeming discrepancy in the Medina's
computerized police logs and the Akron Beacon Journal's
reportage, McDaniel said: "No, we have better things to do."

ANALYSIS

Any evaluation of this UFO sighting is hampered by the
insufficient reportage given by the Akron Beacon Journal. In its
fleeting coverage of the police call, no reference is given to a
specific location of event or description of the object.

It seems quite mysterious that the report from the Akron Beacon
Journal could not be verified from the computerized logs at the
Medina Police Department. While this confusion stands to be
easily clarified when or if sufficient information is made
available, at this time we must conclude that the reportage by
the Akron Beacon Journal newspaper cannot be independently
confirmed.

ADDITIONAL COMMENT

The details of the citizen complaint as reported by the Akron
Beacon Journal were of particular investigative concern due to a
recent outbreak of UFO sighting reports taking place across
Ohio.

On April 7, 2001, three large egg-shaped objects having a
"strange blue glow" were reported near Canton, Ohio (Stark
County) around 5:00 p.m. The objects hovered for a duration
before disappearing completely. Smaller objects were seen to
detach from a larger egg-shaped object and they departed at a
high velocity. (Source: Filer's Files #17 -- 2001, MUFON
Skywatch Investigations - George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO
Network Eastern)

On April 13, 2001, a motorist driving westbound on State Route
87 by the Geauga and Trumbull County line claims to the National
UFO Reporting Center that at 11:37 P.M., a bright beam of light
appeared above the road. His car and another passing automobile
reportedly lost power, their engine and headlights cutting off
immediately. The 'bright light with no sound' was visible for
three minutes, after which the power was restored to the two
automobiles. Radio presets and the clock were reset to
manufacturer's default.

On Tuesday evening, April 24th, police officers near
Waynesville, Ohio responded to a citizen complaint of an
unidentified flying object hovering above the Girl Scout Camp
near Township Line Road and Route 73. The officers, responding
from agencies such as the Waynesville Police Department, The
Ohio State Highway Patrol, the Warren County Sheriff's
Department and the Caesar's Creek State Police Dept., reportedly
observed three mysterious objects for an extended duration and
notified Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio,
advising them of a saucer-shaped object circled by lights. UFOs
were again reported in the area the next evening, April 25th,
also witnessed by police officers. A full investigation of this
incident is underway and analysis of the police dispatch audio
tapes are pending.

People living near Mt. Vernon, Ohio (Knox County) and Newark,
Ohio (Licking County) reported unusual aerial activity on
Tuesday night, April 24, 2001. A man from Newark (about 40-miles
from Mt. Vernon), telephoned his daughter-in-law around 11:00
p.m. to advise of four bright objects in the sky that were held
under observation by many people in a residential neighborhood.
During two telephone interviews on April 25th and 26th, the
daughter-in-law said that after receiving the advisement from
her father-in-law from Newark, she stepped outside with her
husband to see unusual activity in her area near Mt. Vernon,
Ohio. A bright object was seen approaching their position,
seemingly pursued by an F-14 fighter jet. "They chased it down,
the jet went past it the first time around and came back
around," she said. "He was side-by-side with the object, and it
almost hit him. The event lasted about 5-minutes, and it was
F-14 fighter jet pursuing a light at about 11 at night to 1 in
the morning.

On Friday, April 27, 2001, at 3 a.m., a hovering object leaving
a bright orange residue was seen from the Sheridan Mobile Home
Community in South Point, Ohio (Lawrence County). The object,
seen above the treetops, departed at a high rate of speed and
disappeared toward a hillside as if its 'navigation lights' were
turned off. (Source -- UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6, Number 19 by
Joseph Trainor, editor)

On Wednesday, May 2, 2001 a UFO was seen by several workers near
Lorain, Ohio. As they stepped outside during a work break, one
of the employees telephoned his wife to inform her of the
sighting and she also saw "an unusual light" at some distance.
The object was observed for about ten minutes and the sighting
was also recounted on radio station Magic 195 F.M. on Thursday,
May 3. This report is also under consideration.

Filed,
May 11, 2001
KENNY YOUNG
--
      U F O   R e s e a r c h
     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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                         Disclosure Project Support

From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:33:11 -0400
Subject: Disclosure Project Support


Hi everyone

I've been reading the recent posts on the List regarding the
Disclosure Project event on Wednesday. I feel I have to say that
I am so disapointed at people. Here we have an event which could
well spark off something big and all some of you have done is to
rubbish either the project, Greer or a witness or two. Now don't
get me wrong, I don't blindly support the project and yes, it
may fall flat on it's face or just fizzle out to nothing but
don't you all think that while it's in the public and the
media's minds that we should all, as ufologists and/or
researchers, give our backing??

OK, so the media may well find stuff out about some of the
witnesses which could question their credability but that'll
obviously take a bit of time and the longer that the press and
the public believe the credibility of ALL the witnesses then
when some of them are "found out" then it's going to be less
likely for the whole thing to fall down because that seed of
belief has been sown.

Now I'm just a nobody in ufology so what does my oppion matter
but on this list are some influential authors and researchers
who within around 24 hours virtually did the press's job for
them and began destroying witnesses credibility. I may have
missed the point of us all looking into this subject but my
perception was that it was to prove the existence of UFOs and
ETs but it seems that I was way off the mark and it seems like
the purpose is to orchestrate the cover-up ourselves!!

Whatever issues people on the List have with Greer, at least
he's had the balls to organise an event such as this. If we
truely look into our hearts and ask ourselves what we've really
done to try and end all the secrecy and prove to the world that
ETs/UFOs/cover-ups 100% do exist then the answer surely should
be less than Greer. Whatever you think of the Disclosure
Project, the witnesses and it's organiser, we should all stand
behind this and act as a whole rather than individuals. If we
stand as a whole then things get done but if we stand as
individuals then nothing gets done. We can write as many books
as possible but until we stop all this argueing and debunking
between ourselves then no truth will come out!

Many of you will probably have problems with what I've said but
I honestly feel that until we can all work together then
absolutely nothing will happen. I know none of us think exactly
the same but please think of the consequence of your actions
before you begin the "knee jerk" rubbishing.

There's obviously a place for arguements and opinions but please
lets give a united front to the media and the public. If it
appears that we don't believe then how the hell can we possibly
begin to expect the people of the world the believe it too.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I know I'll get some
negative replies to this but I sincerley hope it makes some
think.

Darren Danks










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

               Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 06:53:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:34:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference - Hatch


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Press Conference

 >There's an online article (I note also a link to my web site) at:

 >http://www.now.com/feature.now?fid=1657093&cid=21213&javascript=dhtml

 >James Easton

 >E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
 >www.ufoworld.co.uk


Hello James:

The article shows two photos. If memory serves, the saucer was
shown to be suspended by wires between two trees. The other is a
frame from the patently bogus Mexico City saucer video of recent
vintage.

Thus loaded, the author should have a ready response for anyone
who asks about those same photos from the article. I would not
call that an even-handed presentation, no matter how dismal my
opinion is of the Greer dog-and-pony show itself.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 02:07:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:37:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:02:01 -0500

 >>>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 20:10:12 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>>Before you hang yourself with a G flat piano chord, it would be
 >>>_really_ nice of you to take part in this debate and, _finally_,
 >>>try your best to address the questions asked by the real
 >>>debunkers and the real skeptics.

 >>>If I didn't know better, I'd bet you can't take the heat and
 >>>you are looking for a hole to hide in.

 >>>As a matter of fact, your whole post sounds, pardon the
 >>>expression, like the whining of an impotent about pornography:
 >>>"I can't have sex! Look! Porn is so bad!"

 >>>Your "Until the water clears up significantly, I'm not drinking"
 >>>did send shivers along my spine.

 >>>Will this be your last excuse to avoid the debate?

 >Serge,

 >While looking for my shovel (that's a sort of UFO-shaped thingie
 >on the end of a pole, isn't it), what on earth are you talking
 >about?

 >If Greer is your guy, go for it! Dig that deep hole with both
 >hands, if that's what you want.

 >If Leir and his latest Roswell debris is your guy, go for it,
 >although the latest scrap of same has already been revealed to
 >be terrestrial in nature, by Whitley Strieber, no less.

 >If the so-called MJ-12 stuff the Woods duo is releasing is also
 >up your alley, go for that, too. It's a free country, last time
 >I looked.

 >If you think the UFO water is free of contaminants, then, by all
 >means, drink as much as you want, or can hold.

 >Like Bartleby, I prefer not to at this time, not from the above
 >glasses, anyway.

 >Now, do you have something specific to say that I, or anyone
 >else on this List can make sense of? And remember: no excuses
 >this time.



Hello Dennis:

Ah Bartleby, ah humanity! - was that Melville?

The Scrivener was the one short story I could not put down, even
at the easily distracted age of 16 or so.>It still haunts me at
times. Maybe I'm unconsciously rehearsing the lines for a
certain boss at a certain job, right after I win millions in the
California Lottery or turn 65 or get diagnosed with some
incurable disease. [sobriety or something .. burp!]

Meanwhile, I thought your apology on a different thread was a
very open and gentlemanly act, and I cannot understand Serge's
outburst.

Perhaps he is doing what you said you did; lash out in (well
earned) frustration, but at the wrong guys.

Regardless, you have said in the past that you did have one UFO
sighting that you cannot explain. That's one more than I can
boast, I haven't seen a $%^&ing thing and not for lack of
looking.

Would you be willing to describe this sighting? Maybe even with
enough details that I can at least catalog it? I will keep your
name strictly confidential of course, especially if you respond
on this list.

This may be asking way too much, but would you be kind enough to
give us your opinions on the possibility of something truly
anomalous, in view of this same sighting and others you may
credit?

I know you don't buy into abductions by the millions and any
number of other extravagant claims.>I don't either.>I am willing
to consider the possibility of alien surveillance of Earth
however, robotically at least, and I wonder if you might not
have similar views.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 14:07:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:40:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clarke


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:23:04 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 >Dave,

 >It was weird really, after those years on the Star, you chose
 >the Max Burns sentencing to leave? As you said at the time,
 >your job is done here!

Roy,

Ever heard of the adage "ask a stupid question, get a stupid
answer" ?

Well that's precisely what you got!

Either way, I printed your message off and took it down to
the Star office yesterday (I actually continue to work freelance
for them occasionally), and it raised a few laughs amongst the
hardened hacks.

As for your interest in my welfare, perhaps you ought to discuss
my reasons for leaving with my partner Carolyn who left at
precisely the same time (obviously as a result of the Max Burns
trial too!).

I can report that we are both feeling much better after leaving
the world of cut-and-thrust journalism behind for a more genteel
existence writing freelance, teaching a university course and
pursuing academic research with a generous grant from HM
Government.

Ten years reporting tedious court cases, council meetings,
inquests and industrial tribunals, pursuing confidence
tricksters, drug-dealers, dodgy car salesmen and teenaged
pregnant mothers... working an open-ended 7-day week with the
prospect of a call at any time of day or night from a news
editor demanding copy or another door-knock upon a family who
have just lost a loved one is quite enough for anyone.

Given a chance to leave all that behind and "downsize" who
wouldn't take it?

Compared to journalism the world of ufology is just a
teddy-bear's picnic.

Try looking up the word "coincidence" in your dictionary Roy -
it will appear there.


Dave Clarke









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                  Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton

From: skywatcher22@space.com
Date: 12 May 2001 06:35:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:42:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer

 >My Look at Project Disclosure

 >by Don Ecker
 >Director of Research
 >UFO Magazine

<snip>

 >>To enjoy peace one must be prepared for war. Not a pleasant
 >thought, to be sure, but a true one, nonetheless. And I have
 >found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like
 >dealing with the facts of a situation. And even though I applaud
 >Greer for his efforts with the Disclosure Project, I still
 >believe he and Carol Rosin are "useful idiots."

Don,

I forwarded your comments to my new friend, Carol Rosin. She is
new to the UFO business, does not fully get along with Greer, is
a peacenik, but has a strong stand on weapons in space. I am
sure you wouldn't mind hearing her comments in reply.


Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

              Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -

From: skywatcher22@space.com
Date: 12 May 2001 06:43:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:45:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? -


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - Bogus!
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:12:49 -0700

 >>Date: 11 May 2001 05:53:53 -0700
 >>To: Bill Hamilton <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: skywatcher22@space.com
 >>Subject: Re: Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure? - Bogus!

 >>On Fri, 11 May 2001, UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:

 >>>Source: Rense.com

 >>>Was JFK Removed To Prevent UFO Disclosure?

 >>>From Bill Hamilton
 >>>Skywatch International

 >>>5-10-1

 >>>I am told there was an earlier effort at disclosure on a
 >>>controlled release basis termed "Operation White". Here is a
 >>>startling finding that needs to be seriously considered:

 >>>Bill H

 >>This was bundled in with a factual report on the Disclosure
 >>Press conference and I posted it without really examining where
 >>it came from... I apologize. It is a bogus story. I have
 >>reposted my finding on Skywatch.

 >>I searched and searched to find out where this story came from
 >>originally because I could find no evidence of a professor
 >>Merrick.

 >>Here is the original unreliable source of this story:

 >>Weekly World News newspaper (Canada) Date: April 30th, 1996.

 >>JFK WAS SHOT TO PREVENT HIM FROM REVEALING TRUTH ABOUT UFOs!

 >>A newspaper notorious for printing bogus stories.

 >>Somehow the JFK urban legends are getting cross-filed with UFO
 >>urban legends!


 >Hello Bill & all,

 >My old DC-7 was on the cover of the Weekly World News back in
 >92'  - as a "Airliner full of Skeletons found intact, from the
 >1950's!">It was from a picture of Redmond, Or. Airtanker Base.
 >circa 1988. They didn't bother airbrushing out the retardant
 >tank.

Yeh, I seem to remember that one and the one showing an airplane
crashed on the lunar surface. You could actually see the cut and
paste job in the cover pic. Sloppy work.

Of course, I believe their stories on the end of the world - any
day now when those nasty aliens they have been writing about
retaliate for our hubris in showing Independence Day!

Bill H












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #349

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 08:51:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:48:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #349


Apology to MW #349 (For May 12, 2001)

It's with little trepidation that I go out on a limb, that I let
what disappoints me get the best of me again, that I rake the
past for clues constructing fabrics that I find... that I try to
make some sense of things that trouble all our minds (though
we're all fed that dusty gruel that weaves manipulation for a
'programmed' hapless populous that is plagued by its gestation).
(That's us so parasitic on the skin of Mother Earth. We'd
pretend "dominion" though it's "stewardship's" more worth!) So,
I would find some nourishment in a cross grain look I'd glean...
from the flotsam that surrounds me in the flesh of our
'machine'.

The history we're taught in school's a feel good fabrication;
invented for convenience, it's a stark confabulation. Written by
the winners in a bid to stay on top, the truth is then forsaken
as is often, then, as not. The kids all sense the senselessness
of what they learn in school. They can't articulate it, but they
don't like being fooled. This is why they don't like books -
why history is boring; they don't _like_ the lies they sense that
'teachers' are exploring (who're training mere employees of a
type as dry as dust, while they punish different drummers like
it's THEM that breaks the trust)! And they don't want a teacher
that will teach what can be seen, they want a reproductionist
that will teach tradition's dream.

Conspiracy? It's _likely_ given profits that are paid, given
crooks who take advantage in a world that they have made -
given sociopathy to sell the status quo... that wounds the vast
majority as elitists lift their nose. Conspiracy is certain when
the record's balanced out. When one begins to cop to what it's
really all about. When one begins to see... ...the CIA for
fronting business, and doing NOT what it has _said_ (with smarmy
guile and glibness).

UFOs? They're wound up in the taproot of our lives. They do not
go away and frankly fill portentous skies. And they are well
outside of what we're fed through our TV's. They are _outside_
law, and they instruct we're on our knees. Evidence presumes
that they are here; we're not alone. The Evidence is parchment,
ancient glyphs, and carved in stone. And we forget the
photographs, forget the ones who see, and line up to be utilized
by the ones with 'greater' need. Something is, yes, out there,
but we shove it from our minds. We make them into make believe
and we don't look - or find. And this just crass instruction
from a culture almost dead... that is run on old ideas that look
back and not ahead!

Christians? They're a scary lot who sell a suspect view. They
maintain that UFOs are demons, through and through. But, the
politics of hatred is the stock with which THEY trade; divisive
and egregious, it's the cloth of which they're made. Oh, worse
than many Moslems, and exceeding any Jew, they've made their
creed intolerance, and they threaten freedom, true. They've done
this from their onset; their history is rife. They did not count
on reasoning, but relied upon the knife. They're (in fact!) the
reason that the "dark age" did ensue... when Constantine made up
his mind to 'use' them, we were screwed. Retreat from
'Christianity' was what saved us from that dark, a Renaissance
had intervened and questions made their spark. So, if one's to
be a 'Christian' and one really wants to try, make the Christian
fundamentalist, then, the 'beast' one should deny.

NASA? It's an agency; it's WE who've paid for IT. It's not a
club for good old boys with sneers upon their lips! It's not to
act out petulance and whine because it's crossed, and it's not
allowed to dictate who'll ride or who's the boss. Frankly, I'm
embarrassed at the attitude they copped. They act like snotty
rich kids, yes, whose ears we should have boxed. But that's the
foolish fallacy that NASA's long maintained, that space's club's
exclusive and a jealous tight domain. That it takes a 'special'
person of a type that stands 'above', forgetting for a moment
how they work, come push to shove. Still and all, horse
feathers, if you pay the freight, you go. It's GREAT that crass
outsiders have a chance to get to go. They have a fresh
position, and they're well outside the loop; we've got a brand
new insight in perspective on the truth! And _that's_ the bone's
contention, that an outlook's fresh and clean, that Tito might
return to Earth... and tell us what he's seen...

We don't get, too much, respect... from ALL our institutions.
COPS make themselves the enemy by subverting constitutions. The
LAWYERS look for loopholes to accomplish much the same, and this
is not forgetting that they sell themselves to shame. REVERENDS
and MINISTERS would steer you to the right, and front for
corporate funding through indulgence sold outright. And this is
not forgetting that our planet's overrun, and they're the fault
that most live bad, or under unjust guns. The MEDIA'S convinced
itself it has the middle road. It's offensive to a 'journalist'
with the ethics of a toad. It won't approach the useful stuff,
it won't report the news. It fronts the corporate party line
and sings the corporate blues. It DEFINES "conflict of
interest." It protects the bottom line. It acts like it has
honor, but it's canted one will find. They've NEVER been the
fourth estate, that's just a mask they've made, since Hearst
they've demonstrated what they're made off - how they're paid.
The preceding worked in concert would entail our demise, but for
things... egalitarian (and some UFOs denied).

A Renaissance is coming, and in fact it's almost here. It's
worldwide with the internet and it's freedom's ringing cheer.
It's unfettered information, it's to go 'there' real time.
While 'it' happens you're a witness, and you see 'it' unrefined.
See before it gets its spin. See what has been hidden. Read the
folks you'd never read because they've been forbidden. Think
the thoughts you're thinking; find those others thinking too;
think those thoughts you're warned against, and find a few ring
true. Some must dream they have a lock on what they think they
know, but there is more 'philosophy' than one CAN dream, you
know?

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

The Comedy Channel <tm>... John Stewart's coverage of the
disclosure press con... well - it got no laughs from me. I was
channel chasing specifically with the intention of finding some
coverage on that event from the mainstream... I got my wish.
<heavy freaking sigh>

After a momentary flash of hopeful expectancy provoked by the
appearance of Dr. Greer's talking head in the CRT <which felt
odd, btw <g>>, I quickly noticed the CTV watermark in the bottom
right corner of the screen. ...Profound disappointment, followed
by the keenest sense of outrage I've felt in many moons... this
mainstream's burning the sense of humor right out of me.

Somebody knows!


~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND - John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is - the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by scurrilous
skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                        Ufology UK Online Competition

From: Joe McGonagle <joem_cgonagle@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:29:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:50:39 -0400
Subject: Ufology UK Online Competition


You only have until June 4th to enter this free competition to
win one of 20 books-You have to be in to win!

UFOLOGY UK ONLINE COMPETITION

'Ufology UK and Faster Than Light are organising a competition
to win a fantastic prize and the good people at O'Reilly
publishing have donated 20 prizes for the best 20 answers. The
prize is the new book 'Beyond Contact' by Brian McConnell which
is an intriguing compilation that outlines the many problems and
positive theories and ideas about actually communicating with
alien civilisations. The book takes the reader through various
pertinent technological breakthroughs and of generic
possibilities, which may be synonymous with other races in the
cosmos, able to communicate with us and vice versa. It probes
the question of alien semiotics and re-defines some of the
previously widely accepted notions ET may not be able to
communicate with us and demonstrates communication may really be
possible in a number of ways. Anyone who has pondered this topic
will appreciate the addition of this book to their library, so
why not give this competition a try?

The rules of the competition are simple:

1. The competition is international and anyone may enter;
notices will be widely posted over the next four weeks
publicising the competition for entrants to have plenty of time
to think up their answers. Groups and individuals may enter,
however there will only be one prize per individual or group who
is chosen by judges.

2. Judges will be diligently chosen and represent a balanced
international footing. Some regulars of UFO Updates Mailing list
and other lists may be privately asked to participate as judges,
so if you are asked and can spare some little time, please
consider helping out. Also, an impartial overseer will be
appointed to check the organisation and judging of the
competition is fair and same will act as ombudsman. Judges may
participate in the competition but obviously may not choose
their own entries. Judges will choose the best entries based on
their merit and practicality and will be left to their own
discretion to pick which entrants they think may best represent
this. The decision of judges is final.

3. The closing date for entrants to the competition is June 4
and results and winners will be picked and published as promptly
as possible following this date. If an excessive number of
entrants apply, more than the time it would reasonably take for
pre-chosen number of judges to make their decisions, competition
organisers reserve the right to randomly pick a workable number
of entrants for judges to make their decisions from.

4. There are two questions and both must be answered to win. The
space for entrants to answer these two questions will be
limited, so simplicity and making most in expressing answers is
important. The competition is strictly online through the link
page below, no postal entries will be permitted though a postal
address for each entrant will be required for posting of prizes.
Entrants without postal address will not be accepted.

Question 1. How would you communicate with ET who may not
understand an Earth language?

Question 2. What message would you communicate with ET?

Further details and application to this competition can be found
at:

www.ufology.org.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                         Space - A Military Priority

From: Osley Dias <osley@bigpond.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 01:47:08 +1000
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:53:11 -0400
Subject: Space - A Military Priority


Looks like Space has become a "military" priority... not to
mention the role that former Admiral Bobby Inman, (ex-director
of the National Security Agency (NSA), Deputy Director of the
Central Intelligence Agency, Vice Director of the Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA), and former Director of Naval
Intelligence) plays as JPL Oversight Committee... the question
needs to be asked -  is space really "civilian" or "military"?

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/05/08/bush.space.ap/index.html

http://www.enterprisemission.com/whosnasa.html

Rumsfeld Moves To Strengthen Air Force Space Efforts.  May 8,
2001.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is moving to cement
America's lead as a space-faring nation by putting more emphasis
on its military programs in space and devoting a four-star
general to the task. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
announcing a revamping of space-defense policies Tuesday, said
America must "pay careful attention to protecting and promoting
our interests in space."

The Pentagon's space programs encompass a wide variety of
activities, from satellites to detect and track ballistic
missiles to military communications and intelligence-gathering
efforts. "Space issues are complex and merit a renewed focus,"
Rumsfeld said, adopting some of the recommendations of a
commission he led before becoming defense secretary. He said the
Air Force would become the lead service in coordinating space
activities in the Defense Department. The changes, he said,
"will help the U.S. to focus on meeting the national security
space needs for 21st century." Rumsfeld outlined the changes in
a letter to Congress and at a news conference.

He said he would assign broader responsibilities to the Air
Force Space Command, based at Colorado Springs, Colo., and put a
four-star general in charge of providing the resources to
execute space programs. He did not say who would fill the new
post. Rumsfeld said he consulted with CIA Director George Tenet
on the Pentagon's organizational changes and that Tenet
concurred.

"We can arrange the Department of Defense to focus on meeting
the national security needs of the 21st century and sustain the
United States' position as the world's leading space-faring
nation," Rumsfeld wrote. In the existing military structure, the
Air Force general who is commander in chief of U.S. Space
Command - currently Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart - also holds the
positions of commander in chief of North American Aerospace
Defense Command and the U.S. Air Force Space Command.

Under Rumsfeld's plan, the Air Force Space Command job would be
split off and made a separate four-star position. The Space
Command apparently also would be given broader responsibilities,
possibly including additional authority in the areas of
acquisition, research and development. Rumsfeld wants more
emphasis on organizing, unifying and strengthening the
military's efforts in space operations and research. One aspect
of this is likely to include the role of satellites in the
missile defense system that President Bush has committed the
nation to building. Another aspect may be protecting U.S.
satellites against attack. Until shortly after Bush nominated
him in January, Rumsfeld was chairman of the Commission to
Assess United States National Security Space Management and
Organization. Created by Congress, the commission reported its
findings and recommendations on Jan. 11 after six months of
work. Rumsfeld resigned from the commission after his
nomination. Congress required that once the commission submitted
its report to the secretary of defense, he must inform Congress
how he intended to respond.

The upshot of the commission's report, which naturally reflected
some of Rumsfeld's own views, was that defense and intelligence
space programs are organized and managed in ways that fail to
reflect the growing importance of space to U.S. national
security. The commission said a lack of attention by the
government to its satellites and space policy makes the United
States "an attractive candidate for a space Pearl Harbor." The
United States depends on space more than any other country _ for
surveillance and other military operations, weather forecasts,
cell phone connections - yet the White House, Congress and
various government agencies fail to make space protection a top
priority, the panel concluded. The commission also said military
conflicts in space are inevitable. "We know from history that
every medium - air, land and sea - has seen conflict," the
commission's report said. "Reality indicates that space will be
no different. Given this virtual certainty, the United States
must develop the means both to deter and to defend against
hostile acts in and from space."










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                     Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Sadowski

From: Scott Sadowski <scotty_s@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 11:07:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:55:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Sadowski


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Greer'S Ironic Fate
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:09:41 -0000

 >While reading Kevin Randle's dissection of Sgt. Clifford Stone
 >and his wild claims in today's posts, it suddenly occurred to me
 >that Greer will be hoisted by his own petard. That is, the con
 >man will be done in by the con men whom he believed. Isn't that
 >ironic?

 >Kevin's predictions are very likely to come true. If
 >Congressional hearings were to be attempted (which I frankly
 >doubt will result from this charade), the first thing the staff
 >investigators would do is check on the witnesses, and when they
 >start finding frauds they would quickly lose interest.

 >Some people seem to be cheered by the fact that some national
 >and international publicity resulted. Just wait until someone
 >starts digging a little deeper, if they bother at all. Instead,
 >the most likely result is the standard 24-hour wonder.

 >This is too bad, because some of the witnesses are quite genuine
 >and their reports deserve to be heard. I suggest they ditch
 >Greer and go elsewhere very quickly if they wish to save their
 >reputations. Otherwise, they are likely to be tarred with the
 >same brush.


I was also just thinking that the powers that be have already
done their homework as far as checking the backgrounds of the
witnesses and and finding out if they are legitimate or not and
when they find out that the witnesses are not credible, then, I
think they WOULD grant open hearings. If for no other reason
than to expose the frauds and hoaxers. what better way to
finally end any legitimacy that ufology currently has? Who would
ever listen to us 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                  Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Bourdais

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 14:00:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:58:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Bourdais


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer


 >My Look at Project Disclosure

 >by Don Ecker
 >Director of Research
 >UFO Magazine

 >Allow me to set the record straight at the beginning. I want
 >"world peace!"

Hello Don,

This is a brillant and sincere message of yours. I think I can
agree with most of it. You are one of the people I trust and
respect in the UFO field and I was glad to talk with you in
Lauglin last year.

Yes, weak witnesses aside, this the big problem with Dr Greer,
with whom I had a long conversation a year ago in Paris. I think
is is a sincere man, but he is a true believer in Good ETs! To
him, any dark side, like abductions and cattle mutilations,
comes from bad people in the military and secret services!

This makes a dificult situation because, on one hand, I want the
truth to come out, and I want to support the Greer initiative
(in spite of some debatable testimonies), but on the other hand,
what about if the truth cannot be told because it would be too
frightening? I only have my personnal answer to that : I still
want to know, but I am not sure everybody is ready for it.

<snip>

 >To enjoy peace one must be prepared for war. Not a pleasant
 >thought, to be sure, but a true one, nonetheless.

We French learned that the hard way in 1940: we were not
prepared, and we did not have a sea to protect us.

 >And I have
 >found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like
 >dealing with the facts of a situation. And even though I applaud
 >Greer for his efforts with the Disclosure Project, I still
 >believe he and Carol Rosin are "useful idiots."

Excuse me now, but I do have a point of disagreement with you.
When you speak of useful idiots, there is another name which
comes to my mind at once, being French: Rael!

Watch out, Don, That's a really dangerous one!

I don't know of one serious person in France who takes him
seriously, and it was a litle shock to me to find him on the
cover of your magazine recently.

Sorry, I had to say that, as a friend.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

             Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:07:07 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:00:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:04:25 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

 >>>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>>Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >>>handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >>>excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >>>listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >>>responsibly.

 >>From a technical perspective, I think it went as well as they
 >>could have expected. But did it make any points that the press
 >>could take aware with them and build on?

 >As I said in my original, with the exception of a 'couple'
 >(maybe three) of the witnesses presented, they were 'overall' a
 >pretty credible group of individuals. The press is now in
 >possession of names, ranks, dates, and places. With the
 >investigative resources that some journalists enjoy, there's no
 >reason why they can't sink their teeth into the material offered
 >and simply 'report' the results of their own investigations.
 >(Into the credibility or veracity of the witnesses or their
 >claims/statements.)

 >Kevin Randle has already yanked the 'covers' off of one of them.
 >I'm certain the press will uncover a couple more. I still think
 >that there will be 'enough' credible people left standing after
 >the dust settles to justify pursuing public hearings.

 >>This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
 >>already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
 >>by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
 >>needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
 >>meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
 >>they are.

 >There was 500+ pages of documentation that accompanied the
 >"live" presentation. I believe that the attending members of the
 >press were provided 'hard copies' of all the briefing material.

 >>I'm not sure they're getting the type of coverage they were
 >>hoping for.

 >That, my friend was a forgone conclusion! There is little or no
 >serious coverage of the UFO subject in the "news" media under
 >ordinary circumstances. Why would this be treated any
 >differently?

 >It's all just 'par for the course' man!


I had asked well before the Press Conference if there was
available detailed validation and substantiation of the people
to do the presenting and their stories. The answer was not
satisfactory.

I asked if there was any evidence to support the notion that the
government has developed free energy systems of the type hyped
by Steve.The answer was not satisfactory.

There has been credible testimony from credible people for more
than 50 years. That isn't the problem. What we need are credible
investigations done by credible investigators. A good example
might be Dr. James E. McDonald's 71 page congressional testimony
(certainly appropriate if the goal is Congressional Hearings)
providing detailed investigations of 41 impressive cases.

I personally believe in focusing on Forests not on trees,
especially those large scale scientific studies such as Project
Blue Book Special Report 14. My audiences are certainly
impressed with categorizations, quality evaluations of 3200
cases, the statistical cross comparison that showed that the
probability that the UNKNOWNS were just missed knowns was less
than 1%, that the better the quality of a sighting the more
likely to be an UNKNOWN and the less likely to be listed as
insufficient Information, the proof that the Secretary of the
Air Force lied when he said only 3% Unknowns and then just
because there was not enough information, when the UNKNOWNS were
21% completely separate from the cases listed as Insufficient
Information, that the duration of observation was longer for the
UNKNOWNS then for the KNOWNS. The study was done for the Air
Force by Professional People at Battelle Memorial Institute.not
by a UFO group. Fewer than 2% of the people in my audiences are
aware of it. It isn't mentioned in 13 anti-UFO books though all
the authors were aware of it. I strongly believe that very few
of the press people are aware of it.Copies of the full study are
available.

I haven't heard anybody talk in the coverage about multiple
witness radar visual cases involving professional people such as
the RB-47 case published in a refereed scientific journal. There
was no mention, that I have seen, of physical trace cases, or
that a Professional Committee of the AIAA stated in a
professional journal that 30% of the 117 cases investigated by
Dr. Condon could not be identified. The public paid for the
study. The press echoed Condon rather than the facts.

What about physical trace cases?. The pictures of the Delphos
dirt compared with nearby dirt ,and NOT absorbing moisture, are
impressive.

If there is a focus on secrecy, how about proving it (as opposed
to claiming it) by showing the blacked out NSA and CIA UFO
documents and quoting the Federal Court Judge. The whited out
NSA UFO documents also provide both data and a good laugh. The
quotes from General Carroll Bolender "Reports which could effect
National Security... are NOT part of the Blue Book System" prove
that there are other channels.

Depending on grandiose personal claims, when there is so much
solid data, is fighting the battle with both hands tied behind
one's back. I haven't even talked about nuclear fusion rockets,
abductions, the silly arguments of the SETI cultists,etc


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 12:21:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:04:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:10:52 -0400

Greg,

I wrote:

 >>Do you have the book at
 >>your side? What is your take on this section of the book?

Greg replied:

 >I have the book. I bought it when it came out, and I've read it
 >carefully. (See past posts in the UpDates archive.)

I have read your review on UpDates and found it unsatisfying.
and inconclusive. You imply that you feel Col. Corso is somehow
not telling the truth but supply no evidence to prove your case.

 >What Corso said about the Cuban Missile Crisis in the book was -
 >I'm sorry - nonsense.

Absolute conjecture on your part. Where is your evidence? Staff
are not generally part of official history and you'll seldom
find their names mentioned, but that doesn't mean that they
didn't play a part or didn't contribute to the final outcome.

 >I was interested in checking what Corso
 >said, when the book came out. By coincidence, the book (edited
 >by Harvard historian Ernest May, with whom I took a course when
 >I was in college) of transcripts of White House discussions
 >during the Cuban Missile Crisis had just been published. I
 >compared the two.

Yes, and so what? Corso's name wasn't mentioned? So he wasn't
involved? Col. Corso made claims that he had influenced an
article written by a reporter, Paul Scott, which forced Pres.
Kennedy to react. There is only one way to prove this statement,
one way or the other. Someone needs to check the archives of
both the Boston Globe and the Washington Post (mid- October
1962) and see if there were any columns by Scott which would
confirm whether he wrote about the missiles in Cuba.

 >And then, of course, there are many other sources. The Cuban
 >Missile Crisis hasn't exactly been ignored by historians.
 >There's a large literature, which now includes material from
 >Soviet sources and once-secret Soviet archives, to parallel the
 >once-secret American information now available.

Again so what? Col. Corso may not be mentioned and it means
nothing. Would we have ever heard of Olli North if Iran-Contra
hadn't happened? Would you or any other lister have heard of
Richard Armitage, one of the most powerful men in Washington, if
I hadn't mentioned his name?

 >Ed, maybe I should ask you what you've read of all this history.
 >You're happy to offer your opinion on Corso's role during the
 >Cold War. How much do you actually know about Cold War history?
 >Or are you just sort of making it up as you go along?

I'm not a Cold-War historian but I guarantee that I know as much
as you.

 >It's easy to look at something you don't know about, and say,
 >"Well, look, I can see some ways in which Corso might be right."
 >It's harder to do that if you know - in some detail - what
 >others have written about the same history.

I don't say that. I assert that Col. Corso knew what he knew
from his own personal experience, not the whole story, but part
of the truth. Did he probably make some mistakes? Of course.

But was he full of BS? No! And there is no evidence that he was.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                   Re: Greer Press Conference - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:09:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:06:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Mortellaro


 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:33:15 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:31:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Greer Press Conference
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>This then is the source of my anger. The real point is if this
 >>is the caliber of Greer's insiders, then they will be exposed
 >>quickly. It's just as obvious that Greer and his team do not
 >>bother to investigate the claims being made. When they are
 >>exposed, we all look as if we have no powers of discrimination
 >>and that we all believe these tales. This is what happens to us
 >>every time we begin to make some progress. People leap on the
 >>bandwagon and we are all tarred with the same brush when these
 >>tales collapse as they always do.

 >I sat down with my sister... a school teacher who has no
 >interest in UFOs at all... and got her to watch the entire Greer
 >and Co. press conference. When it was done, her reaction was a
 >very puzzled, "Wow. Is that stuff really true?" I then told her
 >what I had read about Clifford Stone. I told her that I didn't
 >know about the rest of the group, but this is what I had read
 >regarding Stone's record of veracity on the subject.

 >Her reply was, "That's a shame. All those grown men up there
 >lying like that. They should be ashamed." And she totally
 >dismissed the entire subject as bogus.

 >Guilt by association. I know there are ufologists out there who
 >don't agree with my statements along that line, but that is the
 >way it is in "real life" among us John Q. Consumer Pubic types.
 >Ufology is as credible, or not, as the company it keeps.

 >I think you're right, Kevin. In this instance, everyone is going
 >to probably end up tarred, and possibly even feathered, with the
 >same brush.

So sorry to disagree Bobbie... but eveyone is gonna be tarred
and feathered with different brushes. Different pails and
different bails.

Playing that room is tough no matter who the hell you are.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                 Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:35:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:11:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Contest For The Best Piece - Mortellaro


 >From: YoungBob2@aol.com
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 11:21:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Contest For The Best Piece
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 21:24:09 EDT
 >>Subject: Contest For The Best Piece
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>The Canal Street UFO Illogical Society and Discount House of
 >>Freshly Made Wine, Cheese and Publishing presents:

 >>A contest.

<snip>

 >>RULES:

 >>There are very few. Just write an amusing or satirical piece of
 >>a thousand words or more. Subject matter should include UFOs
 >>and we would love to see a biting piece on the subject of UFO
 >>researchers and how they may be punished for their crimes
 >>against humanity. Ours.

 >My submission is that all serious UFO researchers should be
 >required to read the entire transcript of the recent Cosmic
 >Press Conference of Steven Greer and Friends, better known as
 >Snow White and his Twenty Dwarfs. This will be punishment
 >enough.

 >And the Gods will laugh.

 >While this does not meet the technical specifications of the
 >contest, to make be write 954 more words on this subject would
 >amount to inhuman punishment.


Dear Young Bob;

Hmmm. I suggest that you might be aging; perhaps a tad overly so
and not unlike me. I grow impatient with culpable ignorence and
impalpable pap.

Anyway, allow me to comment.

"Nope. Your submission is not only not funny, it is also
rejected. Whilst not a Greer fan in the strictest sense of the
word, I am a rabid fan of truth-seekers. Even ones' who are
improbably such.

However and in light of your previous erudition, I award you
with the award called, "NTBNTT!"

Nice Try But Not This Time.

Your prize? Ain't got one. But may I suggest acquiring at least
a sense of sense of humor? Here's how. Drink a half gallon of my
latest latex Gripple. It's sticks to the walls of your liver and
makes you quiver and quake like a... pelican in heat.


Love and tissues,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 12

                   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:52:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:13:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder


 >From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

<snip>

 >Thank you for taking the time to read this. I know I'll get some
 >negative replies to this but I sincerley hope it makes some
 >think.

Hi Darren. For what it is worth, your post did make me think,
and I have to agree with you. I don't like a lot of what I've
read and heard about some of Greer's witnesses, and it may well
be that, in the long run, their inclusion in his group of
witnesses proves to be the downfall of the whole bunch. I would
have preferred that Greer maybe do a little better screening on
the witnesses, but that's irrelevant now. The deed is done. We
can't go back and change it, but we can try to make the most of
it for all concerned.

I do think you're right to suggest that now is the time for a
united front.

The ufologists and noted researchers may not be getting behind
this project, but I'm seeing a lot of support growing among us
little nobodies out here. There are petitions circulating the
internet, all going to members of Congress, demanding open
hearings on the subject of UFOs. We won't know if that is a bad
thing for ufology or not until those hearings actually take
place...if they take place.


Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 13

                    Edgar Mitchell Not Disclosure Witness

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:07:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:07:38 -0400
Subject: Edgar Mitchell Not Disclosure Witness




From: UFO UpDates Toronto

Source: Rense.com

http://sightings.com/general10/mitch.htm


Ed Mitchell Most Unhappy
With Greer Using His Name As Disclosure Witness

From:         Dr. Jack Sarfatti sarfatti@well.com
Subject:      Astronaut Ed Mitchell on Washington Times
               story of the Greer UFO Disclosure Conference
To:           Edgar Mitchell
Organization: Internet Science Education Project

5-13-1

"Steve Greer... began to overreach his data continuously"

                                        - Edgar Mitchell


Edgar Mitchell) Jack, et al: The Washington Times (story) on UFO
disclosure mentions my name as a witness for the Disclosure
Project -- which I am not ...and have not been.

(Jack Sarfatti) I am not surprised at all. If you look to see
who is running that CSETI Horse and Pony Disinfo Show & Tell you
will recognize familiar names. Consider the source. As a Navy
man and NASA Astronaut who really was Out There, you know what I
mean. :-)

(Edgar Mitchell) I cooperated with Steve Greer some years ago,
but he began to overreach his data continuously, necessitating a
withdrawal by myself, and, I believe, several others. I have
requested to be removed from any web site, announcements, etc.,
but see that has not taken place.

(Jack Sarfatti) Typical of politically-based influence
operations. The real motive of the Press Club Event was the
issue of militarization of space not UFOs, on which reasonable
well meaning people can differ of course. Since many millions of
voters believe UFOs are real, getting control of the UFO
movement clearly is a top priority for all the players.

(Edgar Mitchell) Although I firmly believe it is time for
openness and disclosure by government, I object to being misused
in this fashion and acquire guilt by association with certain
claims that simply are not true.

(Jack Sarfatti) I feel exactly as you do. I think you, Don Ecker
and I see it eye-to-eye on this one.

(Edgar Mitchell) I, nor any crew I was on (I was on three Apollo
crews), received any briefing before or after flights on UFO
events, saw anything in space suggesting UFOs or structures on
the moon, etc. We did it just like we said in official reports.
My only claim to knowledge of these events is from the
individuals, mostly of yesteryear, who were in government,
intelligence, or military; were there, saw what they saw, and
now believe it should be made public. But I claim no first hand
knowledge, nor have any. Pass it on to the rest of the net, if
you will.

--Edgar Mitchell

(Jack Sarfatti) Is The Pope Catholic? Pass it on. I certainly
will. :-)












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 13

                   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Young

From: Bob <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:37:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:09:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Young


 >From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

<snip>

 >OK, so the media may well find stuff out about some of the
 >witnesses which could question their credability but that'll
 >obviously take a bit of time and the longer that the press and
 >the public believe the credibility of ALL the witnesses then
 >when some of them are "found out" then it's going to be less
 >likely for the whole thing to fall down because that seed of
 >belief has been sown.

Darren, List:

So, even though some of this is nonsense, you think that the
longer it remains hidden, the better it is because the press and
public will be fooled long enough for the seed of belief to be
sown?

Anything to plant the seed of belief, eh?  Exactly what religion
are you talking about?

And when eventually the truth comes out, how likely is it that
the press involved will take any future claims seriously?

Or don't you care?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 13

                           OK How About This....?

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:13:05 -0400
Subject: OK How About This....?


Why don't all the ufologists and researchers who are upset,
angry, just a little pissed, concerned, afraid that this Greer
Disclosure thing is going to set serious UFO research back for
10 years or more... why don't all of you get together and hold
your own press conference?

Get up to the microphone one by one and let everyone know what
you know about Greer, his background, the witnesses and their
shady backgrounds, all of it. If we the people are being duped
into petitioning our legislators to hold hearings based on
hoaxes and frauds, and those hearings will indeed eliminate
whatever degree of credibility ufology now has, why don't you
band together and stand publicly against Greer and what his
group is doing?

If you guys can't get together for a formal press conference,
then do it as a webcast. That's a very simple process that
anyone can do. Hell, even I do it every week. If I can do it,
anyone can. And it doesn't cost a dime to do a web audio
broadcast. The only cost involved would be the cost of a long
distance phone call, in most cases.

So if you ufologists and researchers subscribed to this List are
not satisfied with Greer and his very visible antics at the
moment, I suggest you counter them, and counter them quickly, to
avoid any further harm Greer and Co. might be doing to ufology
in general.

Give us John Q. Consumer Public nobodies out here all the
information available so we can make informed decisions about
whether or not to support this Disclosure Project.

Right now, to be honest, the only one we see doing anything is
Greer. Everyone else just seems to be doing a lot of whining.
And frankly, it is getting more than a little confusing. Look at
my last few posts and you'll see what I'm talking about. I,
frankly, don't know who or what to believe anymore.

Just a suggestion

Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 13

                     Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:30:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:15:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:09:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:33:15 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Felder


 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:31:32 EDT
 >>>Subject: Greer Press Conference
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >><snip>


 >>Guilt by association. I know there are ufologists out there who
 >>don't agree with my statements along that line, but that is the
 >>way it is in "real life" among us John Q. Consumer Pubic types.
 >>Ufology is as credible, or not, as the company it keeps.

 >>I think you're right, Kevin. In this instance, everyone is going
 >>to probably end up tarred, and possibly even feathered, with the
 >>same brush.

 >So sorry to disagree Bobbie... but eveyone is gonna be tarred
 >and feathered with different brushes. Different pails and
 >different bails.

 >Playing that room is tough no matter who the hell you are.


 >Jim

Hi Jim.

Please, don't apologize for disagreeing! There's no need
to apologize. I am certainly not so arrogant as to think my
opinion is the only valid one out there. I call 'em as I see
'em, though. I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

Time will tell.

This whole Greer thing is disturbing. I'm really not sure where
it is going to lead. It has a lot of folks on edge around the
UFO circles I frequent.


Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 13

                             On Greer Or Off Him

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:35:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:17:47 -0400
Subject: On Greer Or Off Him


Hmmmm....

Almost everyone seems to be "leary of Greer!" Almost to a
person, everyone is "concerned." Some were (or still are)
downright mistrustful of his dog and pony show.

"Hmmmm" yet again.

I don't see anyone else out there but this dog and his ponies.
No one on this list is out there in the mist with the gory
gorillas. No one putting themselves out on a skinny limb,
risking all, leaving themselves wide open for the most horrid of
ridicule.

Here we have the sad story of Ufology... everyone's intentions
are suspect. No one is trusted by anyone else except a
privileged few who fit the moldy molds created by the old boys
and their networks.

I am reminded of the medical profession when people like Lister,
Pasteur and so many other were out on that same limb, making
assertions about invisible bugs and washing before opening up
people.

Still incalculably closed minded, after all these years. In'nit
about time for a renaissance? Or is that aksing way the hell too
much?

Guess so. Smoke grass. Drink Gripple. And guys, continue to wear
ladies' undergarments. 'Specially if'n it feels good to do it,
say it, write it or opine it. Carry a big stick and speak loudly
of any and all who go out on that limb you are all afraid to be
on. Lest it breaks with too many on it.

Dr. J. Jaime,
"The needles and the damage done....." and ... "Oh the humanity!"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                    Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 22:33:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:40:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Salvaille


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:02:01 -0500

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 20:10:12 -0400

<snip>

 >If Greer is your guy, go for it! Dig that deep hole with both
 >hands, if that's what you want.

 >If Leir and his latest Roswell debris is your guy, go for it,
 >although the latest scrap of same has already been revealed to
 >be terrestrial in nature, by Whitley Strieber, no less.

 >If the so-called MJ-12 stuff the Woods duo is releasing is also
 >up your alley, go for that, too. It's a free country, last time
 >I looked.

 >If you think the UFO water is free of contaminants, then, by all
 >means, drink as much as you want, or can hold.

 >Like Bartleby, I prefer not to at this time, not from the above
 >glasses, anyway.

 >Now, do you have something specific to say that I, or anyone
 >else on this List can make sense of? And remember: no excuses
 >this time.

<snip>

Dennis,

Let's try to put the subject on the right track.

You obviously have a problem with the bullshiters of ufology.

I do also.

But are you also sensitive only to the anti-UFO con-artists?

Please put on the latter this list the vast majority of the
dudes and dudesses who justify their spurious skepticism towards
the subject of UFOs as non-conventional structured mechanisms by
simply ignoring the facts.

A good example of this is the Ravenna 1966 thread started by Dick
Hall:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m07-004.shtml

Curiously - no! _Evidently_ - Hall's question has found no
takers among the usual paragons of scientific reasoning. Heard
from Young and Easton lately?

My sensitivity to manure prospectors does put the debunkers in
the aforementioned category of poppycockers of ufology.

What about you Dennis? Can you smell the smell?

Could you share your views on this?

And while we're at it, could you answer my favorite question
(from Jerome Clark)?

"Do you reject as effectively meaningless and misguided all
reports in which witnesses - including technically trained ones,
under excellent viewing conditions - report structured objects
whose appearances and performance characteristics are unlike
those even of the most advanced military and civilian aircraft?"

Hope this satisfies your...

 >Now, do you have something specific to say that I, or anyone
 >else on this List can make sense of?

As for:

 >And remember: no excuses this time.

I want this on my desk by Monday morning.

Don't forget: you'll be evaluated on the pertinence of your
response.



My pleasure,

Serge









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

              Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - An Entrance To The

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:05:01 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:42:34 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - An Entrance To The


The Cydonian Imperative
5-13-01

"Tube" Leads Way Into "Fort"
by Mac Tonnies



[image]

The "Fort" in Cydonia.

[image]

"Tube" feature emanating from Fort's eastern "wall."

Previously, I've presented my interpretation of the Cydonian
formation known as the "Fort" as a collapsed structure built
atop a geometric foundation. One detail that has escaped my
attention (though not the attention of others) is the
conspicuous "tube"-like feature radiating out of the Fort's
eastern flank. In the enlargement above, the "tube" appears to
rest in a shallow depression that, if extended in a straight
line, would seem to intersect the "Face" itself.

This "tube" feature is perhaps one of the most mysterious of the
ubiquitous Martian "tubes," as it juts from the Fort's
ruler-straight "wall" at a near-right angle: not a trait one
would expect from a wind-driven phenomenon, as suggested by JPL.
The scallops comprising the "tube's" "rings" are densely packed
and of the same size, unlike those of many perplexing "tube"
variants found on Mars.

Moreover, the "tube's" connection to the enigmatic Fort,
suspected of being a ruined arcology, suggests a direct
functional interpretation. Perhaps the "tube" is a sort of rail
system once used to transport Fort-dwellers to the Face or
elsewhere in Cydonia (after all, if the Face, Tholus and other
Cydonia features are cultural artifacts, then they would have
been visited at some point, for whatever reasons). Or, if
Cydonia was once a shallow lake, the "tube" could have been some
sort of water-intake or waste disposal device.

The Fort is largely considered one of the strangest objects in
the Cydonian landscape, and with good reason: its primary wall
parellels the Face's framing mesa, and its morphology strongly
implies structural collapse as opposed to mere erosion (unlike
other landforms, the Fort's lowest point is near its center, the
opposite of which is expected from degradation due to wind or
water). And, as with the Face, the Fort registers as
considerably nonfractal when subjected to software designed to
discern artificial features.

Throughout Cydonia, there are no other "tubes" remotely
resembling the one connected to the Fort. One is forced to
consider the odds of two such morphologically unique,
unexplained features arising next to each other by sheer chance.

The Fort and its bizarre "tube" present a fascinating challenge
to anomalists, and yet another opportunity to put the
Artificiality Hypothesis to the test.

-end-










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 Re: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker

From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:06:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:45:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker


 >From: skywatcher22@space.com
 >Date: 12 May 2001 06:35:24 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton

 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >>From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>My Look at Project Disclosure

 >>by Don Ecker
 >>Director of Research
 >>UFO Magazine

 ><snip>

 >>To enjoy peace one must be prepared for war. Not a pleasant
 >>thought, to be sure, but a true one, nonetheless. And I have
 >>found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like
 >>dealing with the facts of a situation. And even though I applaud
 >>Greer for his efforts with the Disclosure Project, I still
 >>believe he and Carol Rosin are "useful idiots."

 >Don,

 >I forwarded your comments to my new friend, Carol Rosin. She is
 >new to the UFO business, does not fully get along with Greer, is
 >a peacenik, but has a strong stand on weapons in space. I am
 >sure you wouldn't mind hearing her comments in reply.

 >Bill Hamilton


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

Bill:

I put out my essay for a reason. It is on enough sites that I was
sure Ms. Rosin would see it. By all means, I am interested in
her response. However, I hope you sent it in its entirety.

Don Ecker








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 02:11:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:48:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Velez


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:52:08 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support

 >>From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

 ><snip>

 >>Thank you for taking the time to read this. I know I'll get some
 >>negative replies to this but I sincerley hope it makes some
 >>think.

 >Hi Darren. For what it is worth, your post did make me think,
 >and I have to agree with you. I don't like a lot of what I've
 >read and heard about some of Greer's witnesses, and it may well
 >be that, in the long run, their inclusion in his group of
 >witnesses proves to be the downfall of the whole bunch. I would
 >have preferred that Greer maybe do a little better screening on
 >the witnesses, but that's irrelevant now. The deed is done. We
 >can't go back and change it, but we can try to make the most of
 >it for all concerned.

Hello Mz. Felder,

You wrote:

 >I do think you're right to suggest that now is the time for a
 >united front.

Grab on to your panty hose with both hands, I'm about to agree
with you! (And the seas parted and the skies fell! <LOL>)

 >The ufologists and noted researchers may not be getting behind
 >this project, but I'm seeing a lot of support growing among us
 >little nobodies out here. There are petitions circulating the
 >internet, all going to members of Congress, demanding open
 >hearings on the subject of UFOs. We won't know if that is a bad
 >thing for ufology or not until those hearings actually take
 >place...if they take place.

That's not true Bobbie. I'm seeing a lot more unity in support
of _public_ hearings  (not Greer) than I have ever seen among
ufologists.

_Nobody_ has been more vocal than myself when it comes to
blowing the whistle on Greer. If _I_ am willing to put my
formidable differences with Greer aside in the name of
presenting a 'united front' to our elected officials in DC...
then nobody else even has an excuse! Not getting behind public
hearings would be like cutting your own nose to spite your face.

We need to demand public hearings from our elected officials. We
need to tell everyone we know to go out to the disclosure
project website and listen to the witnesses. Who knows, it may
make a difference. We have nothing to lose and everything to
gain.

Ok Bobbie, you can start breathing again.   ;)
Good post Darren. Well said. :)

John Velez
Foot soldier in the war


                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Cover Up At The Disclosure Project?

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 02:32:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:28 -0400
Subject: Cover Up At The Disclosure Project?


Maybe I missed something, but I didn't see anything about Greer
being able to whistle - ah, excuse me as I change into my deep
announcer-like voice - vector in alien space craft. Could we say
that this was a Non-Disclosure in the Disclosure press
conference.

Maybe my sources are wrong! Please point to the part about
vectoring in UFOs, I am sure someone saw it. After all one
billion people are aware of this event according the whistler,
ah, vectorer, (is that a word?) himself.


Jan Aldrich









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker

From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:12:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:05:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Ecker


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 14:00:05 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >>From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer

 >>My Look at Project Disclosure

 >>by Don Ecker
 >>Director of Research
 >>UFO Magazine

 >>Allow me to set the record straight at the beginning. I want
 >>"world peace!"

 >Hello Don,

 >This is a brillant and sincere message of yours. I think I can
 >agree with most of it. You are one of the people I trust and
 >respect in the UFO field and I was glad to talk with you in
 >Lauglin last year.

 >Yes, weak witnesses aside, this the big problem with Dr Greer,
 >with whom I had a long conversation a year ago in Paris. I think
 >is is a sincere man, but he is a true believer in Good ETs! To
 >him, any dark side, like abductions and cattle mutilations,
 >comes from bad people in the military and secret services!

 >This makes a dificult situation because, on one hand, I want the
 >truth to come out, and I want to support the Greer initiative
 >(in spite of some debatable testimonies), but on the other hand,
 >what about if the truth cannot be told because it would be too
 >frightening? I only have my personnal answer to that : I still
 >want to know, but I am not sure everybody is ready for it.

 >>And I have
 >>found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like
 >>dealing with the facts of a situation. And even though I applaud
 >>Greer for his efforts with the Disclosure Project, I still
 >>believe he and Carol Rosin are "useful idiots."

 >Excuse me now, but I do have a point of disagreement with you.
 >When you speak of useful idiots, there is another name which
 >comes to my mind at once, being French: Rael!

 >Watch out, Don, That's a really dangerous one!

 >I don't know of one serious person in France who takes him
 >seriously, and it was a litle shock to me to find him on the
 >cover of your magazine recently.

 >Sorry, I had to say that, as a friend.



Gildas;

It is good to hear from you. Hoping all is well with you.

In regards to Rael, we were not taking either him or his claims
seriously, the aspect that interested us was the cloning that
they are about to attempt. Speaking only for myself I would have
gone about this in another way but the end result turned out
well I think. The cloning story will be the big one in the next
couple of years.


Best;

Don Ecker








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

              Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 02:19:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:36:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Velez


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:07:07 -0300

 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:04:25 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>>From: Steven Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >>>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 07:35:44 -0400

 >>>>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:36:35 -0400
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>>Subject: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!

 >>>>Well, it seems like they're doing a credible job so far. Greer
 >>>>handled both the questions and the Press well. Overall it was an
 >>>>excellent and compelling presentation. I spent two hours
 >>>>listening very carefully and I'm satisfied that it was handled
 >>>>responsibly.

 >>>From a technical perspective, I think it went as well as they
 >>>could have expected. But did it make any points that the press
 >>>could take aware with them and build on?

 >>As I said in my original, with the exception of a 'couple'
 >>(maybe three) of the witnesses presented, they were 'overall' a
 >>pretty credible group of individuals. The press is now in
 >>possession of names, ranks, dates, and places. With the
 >>investigative resources that some journalists enjoy, there's no
 >>reason why they can't sink their teeth into the material offered
 >>and simply 'report' the results of their own investigations.
 >>(Into the credibility or veracity of the witnesses or their
 >>claims/statements.)

 >>Kevin Randle has already yanked the 'covers' off of one of them.
 >>I'm certain the press will uncover a couple more. I still think
 >>that there will be 'enough' credible people left standing after
 >>the dust settles to justify pursuing public hearings.

 >>>This was a good presentation to "believers" or an audience
 >>>already familiar with the subject matter. But short statements
 >>>by witnesses aren't enough to give a reporter the information
 >>>needed to spark an investigative series. There just isn't enough
 >>>meat to chew on, so the focus remains on the witnesses and who
 >>>they are.

 >>There was 500+ pages of documentation that accompanied the
 >>"live" presentation. I believe that the attending members of the
 >>press were provided 'hard copies' of all the briefing material.

 >>>I'm not sure they're getting the type of coverage they were
 >>>hoping for.

 >>That, my friend was a forgone conclusion! There is little or no
 >>serious coverage of the UFO subject in the "news" media under
 >>ordinary circumstances. Why would this be treated any
 >>differently?

 >>It's all just 'par for the course' man!


 >I had asked well before the Press Conference if there was
 >available detailed validation and substantiation of the people
 >to do the presenting and their stories. The answer was not
 >satisfactory.

 >I asked if there was any evidence to support the notion that the
 >government has developed free energy systems of the type hyped
 >by Steve.The answer was not satisfactory.

 >There has been credible testimony from credible people for more
 >than 50 years. That isn't the problem. What we need are credible
 >investigations done by credible investigators. A good example
 >might be Dr. James E. McDonald's 71 page congressional testimony
 >(certainly appropriate if the goal is Congressional Hearings)
 >providing detailed investigations of 41 impressive cases.

 >I personally believe in focusing on Forests not on trees,
 >especially those large scale scientific studies such as Project
 >Blue Book Special Report 14. My audiences are certainly
 >impressed with categorizations, quality evaluations of 3200
 >cases, the statistical cross comparison that showed that the
 >probability that the UNKNOWNS were just missed knowns was less
 >than 1%, that the better the quality of a sighting the more
 >likely to be an UNKNOWN and the less likely to be listed as
 >insufficient Information, the proof that the Secretary of the
 >Air Force lied when he said only 3% Unknowns and then just
 >because there was not enough information, when the UNKNOWNS were
 >21% completely separate from the cases listed as Insufficient
 >Information, that the duration of observation was longer for the
 >UNKNOWNS then for the KNOWNS. The study was done for the Air
 >Force by Professional People at Battelle Memorial Institute.not
 >by a UFO group. Fewer than 2% of the people in my audiences are
 >aware of it. It isn't mentioned in 13 anti-UFO books though all
 >the authors were aware of it. I strongly believe that very few
 >of the press people are aware of it.Copies of the full study are
 >available.

 >I haven't heard anybody talk in the coverage about multiple
 >witness radar visual cases involving professional people such as
 >the RB-47 case published in a refereed scientific journal. There
 >was no mention, that I have seen, of physical trace cases, or
 >that a Professional Committee of the AIAA stated in a
 >professional journal that 30% of the 117 cases investigated by
 >Dr. Condon could not be identified. The public paid for the
 >study. The press echoed Condon rather than the facts.

 >What about physical trace cases?. The pictures of the Delphos
 >dirt compared with nearby dirt ,and NOT absorbing moisture, are
 >impressive.

 >If there is a focus on secrecy, how about proving it (as opposed
 >to claiming it) by showing the blacked out NSA and CIA UFO
 >documents and quoting the Federal Court Judge. The whited out
 >NSA UFO documents also provide both data and a good laugh. The
 >quotes from General Carroll Bolender "Reports which could effect
 >National Security... are NOT part of the Blue Book System" prove
 >that there are other channels.

 >Depending on grandiose personal claims, when there is so much
 >solid data, is fighting the battle with both hands tied behind
 >one's back. I haven't even talked about nuclear fusion rockets,
 >abductions, the silly arguments of the SETI cultists,etc


 >Stanton Friedman



Hiya Stan, All,

I didn't snip a single word of your post up above. Nor would I
butcher it by sticking my responses in between the very
important points you raised. Stan, if there are ever
Congressional hearings on UFOs, you can bet your boots that
myself and a whole bandwagon of people will petition the hell
out of them to include your testimony. ;)

Long time warriors like yourself and Dick Hall have -earned- a
prominent place in any efforts toward disclosure involving
direct contact with our elected officials. I would have voted
for you, or Dick in a New York minute had there actually have
been an election of 'Ufology Representatives' in Washington, DC.
I have bitched a blue streak about how Greer 'ripped it off'
from day one.

I think we all have to put Greer to the side temporarily and get
behind any effort toward public hearings. I have already stated
that I am willing to put my (formidable) differences with Dr.
Greer on the side in the name of presenting a united front to
our reps in Washington.

Not supporting efforts toward public hearings solely because of
Greer's involvement would be like cutting our own nose to spite
our face. I wish there was somebody else down there handling all
this. But,...such is not the case.

Stan do you remember the 60's lounge comedian Mort Sahl? Mort
had a line in one of his jokes that fits this Greer/Disclosure
Project situation perfectly.

"It's like finding out you're pregnant and then trying to fall
in love!"  :)

We all know what the deal is with Greer. That shouldn't stop any
of us from fighting as hard as we can for public hearings. At
this point it becomes a matter of practicality and striking
while the iron is hot. While we hold the public interest.

Thanks for that response Stan.

Wish it was you down there instead of Greer.

Oh well, maybe it is _you_ in one of those alternate dimensions
that have been postulated recently. Wish it was the case in our
'reality system.'  ;)


Warmest regards,

John Velez

In the name of presenting a united front to our reps in DC and
getting a new round of public hearings on the subject of UFOs.

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Strickland

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 06:54:09 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:37:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Strickland


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 14:00:05 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >>From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer


Dear Gildas, Don, EBK, Listers,

Gildas wrote:

 >Yes, weak witnesses aside, this the big problem with Dr Greer,
 >with whom I had a long conversation a year ago in Paris. I think
 >is is a sincere man, but he is a true believer in Good ETs! To
 >him, any dark side, like abductions and cattle mutilations,
 >comes from bad people in the military and secret services!

Gildas,

I know you believe what you wrote above to Don Ecker concerning
the above statement. Dr. Greer may have lead you to believe
that's what he thought. I know he knows better.  He may be
having a difficult time _accepting_ the dark side of abductions
and cattle mutilations, but he knows all about them.


Sue









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                       Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 13:27:03 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:39:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer's Ironic Fate - Hall


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 11:07:34 -0500
 >From: Scott Sadowski <scotty_s@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Greer's Ironic Fate
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Greer'S Ironic Fate
 >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:09:41 -0000

 >>Kevin's predictions are very likely to come true. If
 >>Congressional hearings were to be attempted (which I frankly
 >>doubt will result from this charade), the first thing the staff
 >>investigators would do is check on the witnesses, and when they
 >>start finding frauds they would quickly lose interest.

 >>Some people seem to be cheered by the fact that some national
 >>and international publicity resulted. Just wait until someone
 >>starts digging a little deeper, if they bother at all. Instead,
 >>the most likely result is the standard 24-hour wonder.

 >>This is too bad, because some of the witnesses are quite genuine
 >>and their reports deserve to be heard. I suggest they ditch
 >>Greer and go elsewhere very quickly if they wish to save their
 >>reputations. Otherwise, they are likely to be tarred with the
 >>same brush.

 >I was also just thinking that the powers that be have already
 >done their homework as far as checking the backgrounds of the
 >witnesses and and finding out if they are legitimate or not and
 >when they find out that the witnesses are not credible, then, I
 >think they WOULD grant open hearings. If for no other reason
 >than to expose the frauds and hoaxers. what better way to
 >finally end any legitimacy that ufology currently has? Who would
 >ever listen to us again?

Scott,

I understand what you are saying, but Congress simply does not
work that way and certainly not hand in glove with the Executive
branch.

Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: On Greer Or Off Him - Sanchez-Ocejo

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:42:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:41:41 -0400
Subject: Re: On Greer Or Off Him - Sanchez-Ocejo



 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:35:50 EDT
 >Subject: On Greer Or Off Him
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

The main problem is that 'Ufology' lacks rules and regulations.
For that reason, every single 'ufologist' has made his own rules
and regulations and don't accept someone else rules.

Its becoming an individual issue, "I'm right you are wrong".
Worse and worse we are divided and falling into what is known as
'New Age'. UFO organizations and Field Investigators are
something of the past. More and more you are by yourself.

Either we re-organize ourselves or we fall into the oblivion.
This are very hard times for Ufology. "United we stand divided
we fall". The time is now!

Please, let's do something together.


Dr. Virgilio Snchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
Chupacabras
http://ufomiami.homestead.com/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Re: OK How About This....? - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:52:03 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - Velez


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: OK How About This....?


Ms.Felder writes:

 >Get up to the microphone one by one and let everyone know what
 >you know about Greer, his background, the witnesses and their
 >shady backgrounds, all of it. If we the people are being duped
 >into petitioning our legislators to hold hearings based on
 >hoaxes and frauds, and those hearings will indeed eliminate
 >whatever degree of credibility ufology now has, why don't you
 >band together and stand publicly against Greer and what his
 >group is doing?

That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
Bobbie.

 >If you guys can't get together for a formal press conference,
 >then do it as a webcast. That's a very simple process that
 >anyone can do. Hell, even I do it every week. If I can do it,
 >anyone can. And it doesn't cost a dime to do a web audio
 >broadcast. The only cost involved would be the cost of a long
 >distance phone call, in most cases.

This List _is_ an Internet venue/medium! We've been 'using the
Internet' (and effectively I might add) to get the word out about
Greer and CSETI.  ;)

 >So if you ufologists and researchers subscribed to this List are
 >not satisfied with Greer and his very visible antics at the
 >moment, I suggest you counter them, and counter them quickly, to
 >avoid any further harm Greer and Co. might be doing to ufology
 >in general.

Again, we've been doing exactly that in regard to Dr. Greer and
CSETI for _years_ now.

 >Give us John Q. Consumer Public nobodies out here all the
 >information available so we can make informed decisions about
 >whether or not to support this Disclosure Project.

This may be where you are confused. The opposition and criticism
that you've been hearing is being directed at Greer and not to
the idea/concept of "disclosure." (Which is something we _all_
to a man/woman are in support of.) We support and endorse
Disclosure and public hearings that hopefully will lead to
"official" government disclosure. I think we have all been clear
that it is _Greer_ we have legitimate concerns about. I know
some of you can't see it, but we are acting in good conscience
and because we care about this subject so much.

Many of us have legitimate concerns regarding the involvement of
Steven Greer in these 'important to all of us' proceedings.
Surely we have a right to raise red flags in regard to anyone
who is not 'on the square.'

 >Right now, to be honest, the only one we see doing anything is
 >Greer. Everyone else just seems to be doing a lot of whining.
 >And frankly, it is getting more than a little confusing. Look at
 >my last few posts and you'll see what I'm talking about. I,
 >frankly, don't know who or what to believe anymore.

It's easy Bobbie. We support _disclosure_ and we support
_public_hearings_ we do not support, or trust, Steven Greer -
for all the reasons that have been stated by so many recently.

As I said, we are acting in good conscience and because we
genuinely care. I think we can all get behind securing public
hearings without throwing our support behind Greer. One does not
exclude the other.

Yourself and Mr. Mortellaro ask that we either get behind Greer
or get off him. Like it or not, Greer himself _is_ an issue
here. You make it sound like Greer and public hearings are
inseparable. Support one, you _must_ support the other.

It's just not that simple in this case.

We find ourselves in the difficult and delicate position of
'supporting the cause' but not the person leading it. We have
all been careful to keep the two things separate. Not an easy
trick. As you yourself are an example; it can be confusing to
many folks as to where we stand.

One mo' time!

We support 'disclosure' and we support 'public hearings.' We do
not support/follow Greer. The two are separate issues. We cannot
in good conscience support Greer himself _even if_ he has
_inserted himself_ into a process we are all in strong support
of.


Hope this helps to clarify things a bit.


John Velez

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:11:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:53:28 -0400
Subject: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton


Hi List,

I was just browsing the NICAP website, and came upon the
following "flying saucer" illustration taken from a US Air Force
Manual (AFM 200-3, Chapter 9, Page 3) see:

  http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/manual.htm

There does not seem to be a date referenced on the website as to
when this manual was first published. I'm sure some list members
will be familiar with this illustration, though - so has anyone
got more information on it?


Cheers

Dave B.

--
David G Bolton
<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 15:06:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:55:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 12:21:09 -0700

 >>What Corso said about the Cuban Missile Crisis in the book was -
 >>I'm sorry - nonsense.

 >Absolute conjecture on your part. Where is your evidence? Staff
 >are not generally part of official history and you'll seldom
 >find their names mentioned, but that doesn't mean that they
 >didn't play a part or didn't contribute to the final outcome.

 >>I was interested in checking what Corso
 >>said, when the book came out. By coincidence, the book (edited
 >>by Harvard historian Ernest May, with whom I took a course when
 >>I was in college) of transcripts of White House discussions
 >>during the Cuban Missile Crisis had just been published. I
 >>compared the two.

 >Yes, and so what? Corso's name wasn't mentioned? So he wasn't
 >involved? Col. Corso made claims that he had influenced an
 >article written by a reporter, Paul Scott, which forced Pres.
 >Kennedy to react. There is only one way to prove this statement,
 >one way or the other. Someone needs to check the archives of
 >both the Boston Globe and the Washington Post (mid- October
 >1962) and see if there were any columns by Scott which would
 >confirm whether he wrote about the missiles in Cuba.

Ed,

Perhaps you don't know your Cold War history very well. In any
case, you misunderstood what I wrote.

I didn't say that, in a staff role, Corso didn't do anything in
the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I said that his version of the _overall_ history was wrong --
maybe he influenced a newspaper article, but Kennedy acted on
his own. He wasn't influenced by any newspaper article. Nothing
forced him to react, apart from intelligence reports from the
NSA, the CIA, and aeriel surveillance.

This _is_ documentable. That's why I referred you to the
transcripts of White House discussions, edited by Ernest May.
Here you'll find a moment by moment account of conversations in
the White House before and during the Cuban Missile crisis. If
you read them, you'll see that newspaper articles played no role
in any decision Kennedy made.

More evidence comes in a recent book about the NSA, given a
prominent review in the New York Times two weeks ago. This book
provides interesting information, which I hadn't had before,
about the NSA's role before the crisis. Apparently, Soviet and
Cuban radio transmissions, intercepted by the NSA, alerted
Kennedy that something important was happening with Soviet
forces in Cuba. That, in turn, led to increased air
surveilllance, through which the missiles were discovered.

Again, no mention of any newspaper article playing a role.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:38:36 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 12:17:47 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: OK How About This....?

 >Why don't all the ufologists and researchers who are upset,
 >angry, just a little pissed, concerned, afraid that this Greer
 >Disclosure thing is going to set serious UFO research back for
 >10 years or more... why don't all of you get together and hold
 >your own press conference?

Hello, all Bobbie,

While I was amazed at some of the neutral handling of this
charade, and at _some_ of the content. One should look at
handling of Astronaut Ed Mitchell by Steven Greer, who
apparently used Mitchell and his good name to, well,
further his own purposes.


 >Get up to the microphone one by one and let everyone know what
 >you know about Greer, his background, the witnesses and their
 >shady backgrounds, all of it. If we the people are being duped
 >into petitioning our legislators to hold hearings based on
 >hoaxes and frauds, and those hearings will indeed eliminate
 >whatever degree of credibility ufology now has, why don't you
 >band together and stand publicly against Greer and what his
 >group is doing?

I am not a researcher, or even want to be, but you get a piece
of work like Greer's Circus, that stands in the way of honest
dialogue, the job is made more difficult. As for the press, I do
percieve the ol' Worhol clock has ticked to midnight for Greer.
Ask the avereage Cud chewing Sheeple who Greer is or who Timothy
McVeigh is. Due to the controversy over the alleged screw-up by
the FBI (Nuremberg excuse #2 "Mistakes vere made.") What earthly
good would it be to do a press conference after the 15 minute
attention spans have been broken up and herded in to a new,
greener, pasture.

 >If you guys can't get together for a formal press conference,
 >then do it as a webcast. That's a very simple process that
 >anyone can do. Hell, even I do it every week. If I can do it,
 >anyone can. And it doesn't cost a dime to do a web audio
 >broadcast. The only cost involved would be the cost of a long
 >distance phone call, in most cases.

 >So if you ufologists and researchers subscribed to this List are
 >not satisfied with Greer and his very visible antics at the
 >moment, I suggest you counter them, and counter them quickly, to
 >avoid any further harm Greer and Co. might be doing to ufology
 >in general.

How would one get the attention of the public? Wait for a slow
news day? Put something out that says you now have irrefutable
evidence of UFOs and the occupants? You have a piece of the
Roswell craft? (Oops ,that one's been done, and with worse
results than the Greer Circus.) To collectively counter a
statement like Greer's, the public -likes- to hear his message
of peace, love and spacebrotherhood.

What the public would _not_ like is the possibility that they
may be hostile, kidnapping, cow mutilating, indifferent,
entities of unknown origin or intent. Also the possibility that
we have not one clue what is going on. Also the possibility that
there is a Government cover-up that they think is for our own
good (Debatable). This is why Greer is going to get the Press.
The other side may not get any press until a Klingon Battle
fleet covers the full Moon.<G>

 >Give us John Q. Consumer Public nobodies out here all the
 >information available so we can make informed decisions about
 >whether or not to support this Disclosure Project.

 >Right now, to be honest, the only one we see doing anything is
 >Greer. Everyone else just seems to be doing a lot of whining.
 >And frankly, it is getting more than a little confusing. Look at
 >my last few posts and you'll see what I'm talking about. I,
 >frankly, don't know who or what to believe anymore.

 >Just a suggestion

With what has been revealed about some, not all mind you of the
folks that were there, and the fact that Greer was not above
using famous names to promote this little clambake, to me the
debate is over. You can believe some folks are sincere, but
misguided, or the fact that some of the experts, even ones that
are forthright and honest, make mistakes. But using people's
good name or rep is something else. "By their works you shall
know them." has been a staple of human existence in many
cultures.

For me, I'm not a consumer, I'm on this List to find out what I
saw, and why.

I am comfortable with being at peace with The God who is there,
I have no axe to grind, even with those who are not agreeing
with my position. As folks who are like myself (and I think that
there are only a handful on this list who are simply
"experiencers") all we want is some sort of answer, but as for
the little wooly brained ones who watch (and believe) say, the
CBS evening news, or CNN, or ABC, or whatever your flavor of
filter is, The attention deserved by them will be the spaceship
on the White House lawn, hopefully not say a Klingon Bird of
Prey. Even then there will be debunkers.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

             CCCRN News: 05-13-01 First European Crop Formation

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:28:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 13:54:26 -0400
Subject: CCCRN News: 05-13-01 First European Crop Formation


CCCRN NEWS
The E-News Service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

May 13, 2001

_____________________________


The first European crop formation of this year has been reported
at Aalten, Gelderland, Holland on May 6, a seven circle
pictogram in grass. Full report is at the Dutch Cropcircle
Website:

http://home.hetnet.nl/~cropcircle/crop2001/Aalten05.htm

No reports as of yet from England, keeping in mind the growing
season this year was about a month behind normal.

Thanks to Andreas Mueller for forwarding this report.


____________________________


CCCRN News is the e-news service of the Canadian Crop Circle
Research Network, providing the latest news and reports on the
crop circle phenomenon in Canada and other relevant updates, as
well as other information on CCCRN-related news, projects and
events


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH NETWORK

Main Office:
Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

Provincial Branch Contacts:
http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                            Gordon Or Not Gordon?

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 22:17:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:02:01 -0400
Subject: Gordon Or Not Gordon?


The John Spencer/BUFORA 1991 book "The UFO Encyclopedia"
contains an entry headed "Press Conferences" - I'll quote the
entry here in full:

[quote]

There have, of course been innumerable press conferences on the
subject of UFO research but one held by the US Air Force during
the 1973 wave of sightings in the United States of America must
stand as probably the most useless and uninformative ever.

Base officials started by explaining that UFO reports were not
recorded because, "The Air Force does not admit the existence of
UFOs." The Department of Defence spokesman did not have a
statement to make and when asked why explained, "I can't answer
that question." Two other Pentagon officials joined in, a
Colonel Jack Powel and a Lieutenant-Colonel Williams.
Lieutenant-Colonel Williams spent his time rejecting requests
for his first name and Powell added a wealth of knowledge to the
UFO phenomenon by stating, "I don't know his first name myself."

There was some considerable confusion when eventually an
O.G.Willoughby was listed as the source to be contacted but no
one could spell his name. He was eventually located in the
Defence News branch of the Pentagon and made the comment, "It's
time for me to go off duty, and I cannot talk to you."

The press, normally tenacious, gave up in exasperation.

[end of quote]

Now then, as everyone here knows, there was a Colonel Gordon E.
Williams at Bentwaters during the infamous Rendlesham CE1/2/3
(take your pick). His actual involvement in the incident, of
course, varies depends on whose books you read.

The question is, was the Lt.Col. Williams of the 1973 UFO "press
conference" the same guy? When was Gordon Williams promoted to
full Colonel? How many half Colonels were there in the Air force
in 1973 called Williams?

It is to be presumed that, however inept they appeared, the Air
Force spokesmen put forward at the press conference had some
involvement with official UFO policy. It would be an interesting
coincidence, then, if the same chap was later stationed at a
base at which a UFO put in an appearance. It would also be
mighty strange if such a person didn't bother to get involved in
the incident in any way.

Can anyone throw any more light on this possible connection? Am
I barking up the wrong pine tree?


David G Bolton
<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                  Re: Disclosure Project Support - Harrison

From: Diane Harrison - AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 08:43:39 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:09:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Harrison


 >From: Bob <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:37:24 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

 ><snip>

 >>OK, so the media may well find stuff out about some of the
 >>witnesses which could question their credability but that'll
 >>obviously take a bit of time and the longer that the press and
 >>the public believe the credibility of ALL the witnesses then
 >>when some of them are "found out" then it's going to be less
 >>likely for the whole thing to fall down because that seed of
 >>belief has been sown.

 >Darren, List:

 >So, even though some of this is nonsense, you think that the
 >longer it remains hidden, the better it is because the press and
 >public will be fooled long enough for the seed of belief to be
 >sown?

 >Anything to plant the seed of belief, eh?  Exactly what religion
 >are you talking about?

 >And when eventually the truth comes out, how likely is it that
 >the press involved will take any future claims seriously?

 >Or don't you care?



Hi Bob and all

What we all have to be very careful of is that 'we' Ufologists
don't become the de-bunkers of the evidence being presented. The
media watchdogs are now watching and waiting for any break in
ranks and we are all very much aware Ufologist can be their own
worst enemy.

If good comes out of this, great. If it fails they can all say
they tried. I would rather have tried and failed than never have
tried at all. I can only recommend that we all view the
information with an open mind be it old information or new...
for if this project succeeds it will change the history of
history.

I personally don't want to be remembered has a bitching and
negative Ufologist. We all have to work together and join ranks.
So lets put our egos and prejudices aside and help with the
"Disclosure"

If we don't it won't be only Steven that gets a slamming from
the Media... it will be all of us. The eyes of the Worlds media
is now watching "All of us".


Regards

Diane Harrison

Skywatch Australian Director
National Director The Australian UFO Research Network

Tel number 1800 77 22 88 a Free Call
Australian UFO Research Network -
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw


A non profit organisation
P.O Box 805
Springwood Qld 4127










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 The Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - Update!

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:10:54 -0400
Subject: The Cydonian Imperative: 5-13-01 - Update!

The Cydonian Imperative
Update 5-13-01
by Mac Tonnies

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html (page 18)


[image]

Probable continuation of "tube" across surface of Fort's eastern
"platform."

Update: On closer inspection, I noticed that a distinct (though
evidently abraded) linear feature crosses the surface of the
Fort's eastern "platform." This feature parallels the
aforementioned "tube" feature, leading one to further speculate
that this is the remains of a trasportation system. This was a
truly surprising find. As my survey of the rest of the Fort's
"platform" revealed no additional linear features, the evidence
indicates rather strongly that the "tube"--whatever it
is--somehow shares a direct relationship with the newly
discovered feature.

The "tube's" apparent continuation leads directly into the
sunken mass I have postulated might be the collapsed remains of
an enclosed dwelling. Perhaps the "tube," with its elevated
continuation, constituted an elevator system whereby the
inhabitants of the Fort could descend to ground level.

----

[image]

Short crests to the immediate east of "Cliff" suggest mining
operation. Image courtesy Lan Fleming.

SPSR's Lan Fleming has noted that the small, "tube"-like
"grooves" located to the immediate east of the Cliff defy JPL's
sand-dune explanation, as the wind forces necessary to deposit
the "dune trains" posited by JPL could simply not form in the
space afforded. (The features JPL specifically addressed are of
the longer variety, such as the infamous "Glass Worm" addressed
by Richard Hoagland and Arthur C. Clarke.)

The presence of these inexplicable "grooves" may not come as a
surprise to proponents of the Artificiality Hypothesis, who have
long suggested that the Cliff was assembled out of debris
ejected from its adjacent impact crater. Lack of "blast shadow"
strongly suggests that the Cliff formation was formed after the
impact event, possibly as a megascale construction project using
impact ejecta as a construction medium. This possibility was
hinted at in the Viking image of the Cliff, in which the terrain
to the feature's eastern side looks strangly "roughened," as if
plowed or otherwise excavated.

The new MGS photo adds weight to the hypothesis that the Cliff
was in fact built, possibly using large machines. The nature of
the straight, architectural-looking defile on top of the Cliff
remains unexplained, as does the presence of the "tetrahedral
rim pyramid" seemingly carved into the northeastern lip of the
nearby crater.

-end-









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                       A Wasted Greer Press Conference

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 05:40:28 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:16:26 -0400
Subject: A Wasted Greer Press Conference


Hello fellow Listerians,

I had told myself I was going to give Greer one last chance to
redeem himself by having his press conference. I went from
worried beforehand to pissed-off afterward. His lack of
standards of evidence, as evidenced by some of the people he
presented, made what could have worked for Ufology into a
foolish fantasy land. But I guess I shouldn't have expected much
considering the history of CSETI and Greer's own beliefs in
fantasy land.

I agree with most of the posts regarding his idiotic way of
handling this, not even winnowing out the nutcases from the real
testimony. Judging from the press I've seen, his show made
little effect. I'm not excactly going to hold my breath waiting
for hearings.

I think Stan Friedman made excellent comments. Jim McDonald,
please come back from the beyond. You are badly needed. I'd like
to see you tear Greer apart over his delusions, perhaps on MTV
Celebrity Deathmatch. To be even nicer, I think Greer pissed on
his own petard before he hoisted himself on top of it. That's
about all I have to say about this sorry state of affairs. Other
posters have covered the issues.


I also agree with Kevin Randle in his post.

First though, I'd like to catch up on a comment I never made to
his post about the Coyne case.

I also flew Hueys in Vietnam  On the slim chance there is a
veteran of my unit on this List, I was in the 175th Assault
Helicopter Company, The Outlaws and the Mavericks. I was based
out of Vinh Long, in the Mekong delta, from April 1967 to April
1968.

Some years ago I had good chats with Kevin and with Don Ecker
regarding the war. Years ago Dick Haines asked me if I had ever
seen anything UFO related there. Sorry to say, I didn't. I did
not see a crashed B52 swarming with aliens. Do the thousands of
bullets, shells, and rockets that headed in my direction but did
not have my name on them count as UFOs? They were all flying but
I guess these UFOs were Unidentified Foreign Objects. They were
trying to abduct my life.

If Coyne was in a dive he had his left hand on that collective
stick. He was also carefully watching the altimeter and the rate
of climb (and dive) indicator. In a dive his collective would
have been down. It's possible that he could have started
climbing and forgotten the position of the cyclic but I highly
doubt it. If he rose to 3,500 feet and at that point discovered
the collective in the down position, he would have started
dropping down as soon as something pulling him up stopped. He
would have pulled up the collective at that point to get some
pitch in his blades in order to stop dropping.

I also agree with Kevin regrding Clifford Stone, another one of
the many loose nuts who have littered this field for some time.
I don't believe Stone's fantasy tale about Vietnam. Kevin
covered that pretty well.

Shame on Greer for not even having the sense to not look like a
fool by not setting reasonable standards. And what about Daniel
Sheehan? How would he, as an attorney, allow himself to be part
of amateur hour. Peter Gersten probably would have handled it
better, it would have also been a New Age circus.

Do aliens have chakras, or is that Chopras?

I'd better get to sleep and dream that Greer's show did not
happen.


Sanity calls,

Josh












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:15:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:19:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200

<snip>

William wrote:

 >Corso was a patriot and couldn't stand by and let the US be made
 >a fool of so he contacted Paul Scott a political columnist of
 >some note and divulged "all" to him. This too me was a very
 >crafty way of forcing the Presidents hand by making the info
 >public whilst still remaining in the background as an
 >unknown...where all good intelligence ppl should be.

 >Scott, or others he told released the story to the public
 >forcing the President to confront the Russians. The rest is
 >history.

What most people are "ignorant" of is that their was storys and
tales being told about so called missiles and other in cuba for
at least a year previous to the crisis. Folks coming out of the
country to the US were telling storys about missiles and such.
This was leaking out to the media in August of '62. I also
recall seeing a CIA estimate dated in August of 62 which spoke
of the anti aircraft type missiles being put in Cuba, or Cuber
as JFK referred to the country.

JFK's own CIA director warned about the Soviets introducing
military equipment including missiles into Cuba in the many
months preceeding the crisis.

The point being that tales and storys about Russian military
equipment including missiles being introduced into Cuba were
either being discussed by administration officials and or
leaking into the media long before Corso ever showed up. Also
keep in mind that nobody cared as long as the weapons were not
considered "offensive" in nature.

It wasn't until a U-2 photo recce plane brought back photo
evidence (actual proof if you will) of cannisters on the ground
in cuba, and the photo interpretation team identified them as
missile containers and informed JFK. The photos are what
"forced" JFK to deal with Cuba.

As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
did not identify Corso by name. Unless someone can find Paul
Scotts papers where he claims to have gotten all the details
from Corso, all we would find out is that Corso was one of many
100s of people telling storys about missiles in Cuba. The bottom
line is JFK did nothing until the photographic proof was in
hand.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:43:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:21:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:16:21 -0700

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 17:16:44 -0300

 >>>Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >>>pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >>>FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >>>missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.

 >See my reply to Greg.

 >>There are other serious problems with Lieutenant Colonel Corso's
 >>claims, such as his falsely claiming in a sworn statement to
 >>attorney Peter Gersten that he had been a member of the National
 >>Security Council.

 >I have not seen that statement. I believe he wrote that he was
 >Ike's military advisor to the NSC. In the introduction, Strom
 >Thurmond wrote: "Corso had also spent four years working at the
 >NSC". The facts may be a little confusing but as you point out,
 >Col. Corso did not have the opportunity to correct the obvious
 >flaws he found. I also know that John Alexander checked out Col.
 >Corso's credentials and found them AOK.

Other then the problem with him being the head of the Army FTD
for only a few months as opposed to what he was claiming.

Most people don't recall that Thurmond said he got stroked by
Corso who claimed to him he was writing a book about his
military career. As I recall the Forward got pulled on one of
the next publishings.

 >>A Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded not long ago for work done
 >>in 1958, that Corso claimed he had provided to industry in 1961
 >>from alien technology.

 >Have you read 'The Day After Roswell'? Which transfer of
 >technology are you refering to here?

 >>His own son in a public forum (which he wouldn't allow to be
 >>taped) in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, (Journey's Beyond
 >>Conference) last fall, claimed that only 10% of the book was
 >>worthwhile because Corso had not been able to review it.

 >That's correct. Col. Corso was not able to review the book but I
 >think his son's statement is a bit of an exaggeration. Col.
 >Corso stated many times that the main thesis of his book was
 >absolutely true: he seeded alien technology to the US business
 >community.

We know that Corso himself claimed that Birnes stroked the book.
We have Corso's son who claims that only 10 percent of the book
is worthwhile, i.e. true. Naturally everybody that thinks every
jot, tittle and word of Corso's book is absolute fact never to
be doubted does not want to discuss the fact that Corso himself
said the book itself had problems. Never mind that fact that
Birnes claims that the book is Corso. Then you had Corso's son
who was going to release the "actual" Corso story that was
written with his own hand as opposed to being Birnesized.

The point being is that no matter what story is told, no matter
who tells the story, the principle people involved in creating
Corso's book and after his death, his own son, discredit the
very work that all the Corso supporters claim is fact never to
be doubted. The actual truth appears to be that the book is
probably 20-90 percent a stroke job and the rest (whatever that
may be) *may* be fact. The people responsible for this are
Corso, Birnes and Corso's son.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:23:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

<snip>

Dennis wrote:

 >More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >- that should be your job.)

 >Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >with yours?

Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
In other words you could have a code word security clearance
with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
classification level.

The point being is that if you understand the classification
system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
access to AF UFO files.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Re: OK How About This....? - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:27:24 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - Randle


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: OK How About This....?

Bobbie, List -

 >Why don't all the ufologists and researchers who are upset,
 >angry, just a little pissed, concerned, afraid that this Greer
 >Disclosure thing is going to set serious UFO research back for
 >10 years or more... why don't all of you get together and hold
 >your own press conference?

And the point would be? What would you have us announce?
More of the same. "Well, we have no documentation or physical
evidence to prove our point, but we do have these people who
will tell you a good tale about their involvement with UFOs. Just
don't check too deeply into the background."

When we provide the information and documentation that some
of Greer's "insiders" have invented their tales, what is your
response? How many times do we have to go through all of this?
And why should I hang myself out to dry when the majority of
the UFO community is not going to believe what I say because
they don't like the message.

I once spent an hour and a half reviewing the documentation, note
here documentation, that Gerald Anderson had forged his telephone
bill and had lied about aspects of his report. I had, what I believed
to be an interesting conversation with a man who wanted to believe
in Gerald Anderson, but I had the evidence. When we concluded, he
asked, "How do you know that the government didn't intercept and
alter Anderson's bill to make him look bad?" I had just told him, with
evidence, why and how Anderson had done it, but he wanted to
believe the Anderson tale and evidence made no difference to him. After
Anderson admitted to forging the telephone bill, I have wondered how
the man would alibi that.

 >Get up to the microphone one by one and let everyone know what
 >you know about Greer, his background, the witnesses and their
 >shady backgrounds, all of it. If we the people are being duped
 >into petitioning our legislators to hold hearings based on
 >hoaxes and frauds, and those hearings will indeed eliminate
 >whatever degree of credibility ufology now has, why don't you
 >band together and stand publicly against Greer and what his
 >group is doing?

Let's see, we still argue about the validity of the Alien
Autopsy film, though Ray Santilli has admitted that the tent
footage is a hoax, there have been no chemical tests to date the
other footage, the cameraman remains unnamed, though the
information about him is obviously untrue.

Every five years we argue again about the Allende Letters even
though Allende (Carl Allen) provided Jim Lorenzen of APRO a
signed statement that he had invented the whole tale. We have
heard Greer claim that he can call UFOs down with his
flashlights and issues boarding passes to his followers.

We argue about George Adamski even after science has shown Venus
to have a surface temperature of 800 degrees.

Don Schmitt, caught in lies about his education, occupation, and
investigation still lectures.

People are attempting to rehabilitate Gerald Anderson caught in
lies about his military service, his high school classes and
forging documents.

Harley Byrd has promoted himself from nephew of Admiral Byrd to
grandson, but no one notices or seems to care. There is one man
who continues to draw big crowds even after he spent seven years
in jail for child molestation and another who did time for grand
theft auto...

I could go on, but we refuse to police ourselves, so what would
be the point. We have the evidence about these people and if we
mention it, then suddenly we become the bad guys out to destroy
ufology just because we have told the truth. We are called
jealous because we didn't get invited to participate in Greer's
circus and when we do post information suggesting problems, we
are attacked as "big name" ufologists who are jealous.

 >If you guys can't get together for a formal press conference,
 >then do it as a webcast. That's a very simple process that
 >anyone can do. Hell, even I do it every week. If I can do it,
 >anyone can. And it doesn't cost a dime to do a web audio
 >broadcast. The only cost involved would be the cost of a long
 >distance phone call, in most cases.

 >So if you ufologists and researchers subscribed to this List are
 >not satisfied with Greer and his very visible antics at the
 >moment, I suggest you counter them, and counter them quickly, to
 >avoid any further harm Greer and Co. might be doing to ufology
 >in general.

Have tried to do that for years, but I'm always made out to be
the bad guy on this.

 >Give us John Q. Consumer Public nobodies out here all the
 >information available so we can make informed decisions about
 >whether or not to support this Disclosure Project.

 >Right now, to be honest, the only one we see doing anything is
 >Greer. Everyone else just seems to be doing a lot of whining.
 >And frankly, it is getting more than a little confusing. Look at
 >my last few posts and you'll see what I'm talking about. I,
 >frankly, don't know who or what to believe anymore.

Yeah, Greer is doing something. Doesn't matter what it is, as
long as someone is doing something. Greer doesn't care about the
truth because, if he did, he would have checked the backgrounds
of these people. But that's okay because he is doing something
and the rest of us are just jealous.

So, once again, would be the whole point? You have the data, but
you would rather accuse of us something evil rather than believe
that Greer's press conference is doomed and we'll get splashed
with the debris. The question that should be asked is if Greer
can call down flying saucers, why not show the press one of
those rather than several people whose military credentials are
less than perfect.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:21:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:33:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 12:21:09 -0700


 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:10:52 -0400

<snip>

Ed, Greg, List -

Ed wrote:

 >I have read your review on UpDates and found it unsatisfying.
 >and inconclusive. You imply that you feel Col. Corso is somehow
 >not telling the truth but supply no evidence to prove your case.

I have attempted to avoid this fight, and I believe that Greg
can defend himself quite well, however, I might throw a little
fuel on the fire. I know that Corso (and not co-author Birnes)
lied, at least twice.

First, when asked why the cover of his book said "Colonel"
rather than "Lieutenant-Colonel", Corso replied that he had been
promoted to Colonel in the Reserve so the title was appropriate.
I won't mention here that publishers often make assumptions and
the mistake could have been blamed on them. Instead, Corso chose
to lie about it. His record clearly indicates that the highest
rank he held was Lieutenant-Colonel. (And I won't even comment
about how he was a Major in 1945 and retired in the early 1960s
as only a lieutenant colonel).

Second, I watched him at the Roswell press conference where he
claimed that he had been the Commander at the White Sands
Missile Range. Not that he had been a Commander (of a Battalion)
but the Commander. I have watched the tape dozens of times, and
he clearly claims that he was "The Commander". The website of
the White Sands Missile Range lists all the commanding officers
and Corso is not among them. Again, this is not a mistake that
can be blamed on Birnes.

<snip]>

 >I don't say that. I assert that Col. Corso knew what he knew
 >from his own personal experience, not the whole story, but part
 >of the truth. Did he probably make some mistakes? Of course.

I will assert that Lt. Col. Corso knew what he knew from reading
all the Roswell books, watching all the Roswell documentaries,
and searching all the Roswell websites. He knew nothing from
first-hand knowledge, but that didn't stop him.

 >But was he full of BS? No! And there is no evidence that he was.

Of course he was and there is plenty of evidence. Just read,
again, his tale of how he happened to see the body of the alien
in 1947. Utter crap as anyone who has dealt with classified
material, especially that under transport, can tell you. And ask
yourself this question. Why truck the bodies to Wright Field
when you have transport airplanes at your disposal to fly them
from your airfield to another? Isn't it faster with fewer
opportunities of compromise? And, isn't it true that those who
were at Roswell and who claimed to know about this suggested
that the bodies were flown out? If that is true, then there was
no opportunity for Corso to have seen anything in Kansas and his
story goes into the dumper once again.

Sorry, Ed, but Corso wasn't telling the truth.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:31:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:34:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Randle


 >From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

Darren, List -

 >I've been reading the recent posts on the List regarding the
 >Disclosure Project event on Wednesday. I feel I have to say that
 >I am so disapointed at people. Here we have an event which could
 >well spark off something big and all some of you have done is to
 >rubbish either the project, Greer or a witness or two. Now don't
 >get me wrong, I don't blindly support the project and yes, it
 >may fall flat on it's face or just fizzle out to nothing but
 >don't you all think that while it's in the public and the
 >media's minds that we should all, as ufologists and/or
 >researchers, give our backing??

First, I thought long and hard before I posted the information
about Cliff Stone. He is so typical of those seeking the
spotlight. Obviously, he cares little for the truth and he is
one of the few that I believe is not convinced of his own
delusions. He has, in the past, done some very good work. He has
worked very hard to gather documents. Now, he has moved from a
researcher to a participant, but the evidence does not support
the move.

So, no, I don't believe that we should blindly give our backing,
especially when we know some of the truth. Isn't that the very
thing that many of us complain about concerning government
secrecy. Now, we have the chance to expose a fraud, but in the
interest of giving our support, we overlook the problems. And
what will the skeptical community do when they learn the truth,
as they will? Won't that make us all look bad, and in the long
ruin end everything we attempt to do? Why support something that
we know is doomed because of the mistakes that have been made.
Shouldn't we correct the mistakes?

 >OK, so the media may well find stuff out about some of the
 >witnesses which could question their credability but that'll
 >obviously take a bit of time and the longer that the press and
 >the public believe the credibility of ALL the witnesses then
 >when some of them are "found out" then it's going to be less
 >likely for the whole thing to fall down because that seed of
 >belief has been sown.

It will take no time at all, and then everything will be
dismissed. It only takes one to destroy everything. Think Bill
Buckner here. Isn't he the first baseman who allowed the ball to
get under his glove and rather than ending the game with an out
at first, everyone was safe, the other team won the game and
eventually the World Series? The point is that we remember his
single error and we forget all the amazing plays he made. One
bad apple will spoil the whole project. This could be avoided by
the simple expedient of checking the data before using them.

 >Now I'm just a nobody in ufology so what does my oppion matter
 >but on this list are some influential authors and researchers
 >who within around 24 hours virtually did the press's job for
 >them and began destroying witnesses credibility. I may have
 >missed the point of us all looking into this subject but my
 >perception was that it was to prove the existence of UFOs and
 >ETs but it seems that I was way off the mark and it seems like
 >the purpose is to orchestrate the cover-up ourselves!!

Yes, you missed the point. It is the job of every researcher to
verify the information and report the results, good, bad or
indifferent. If we don't, then we are participating in a cover
up. The purpose is to bring the best information forward, not
the most interesting tales of UFO involvement, especially those
that are known to be false.

 >Whatever issues people on the List have with Greer, at least
 >he's had the balls to organise an event such as this. If we
 >truely look into our hearts and ask ourselves what we've really
 >done to try and end all the secrecy and prove to the world that
 >ETs/UFOs/cover-ups 100% do exist then the answer surely should
 >be less than Greer. Whatever you think of the Disclosure
 >Project, the witnesses and it's organiser, we should all stand
 >behind this and act as a whole rather than individuals. If we
 >stand as a whole then things get done but if we stand as
 >individuals then nothing gets done. We can write as many books
 >as possible but until we stop all this argueing and debunking
 >between ourselves then no truth will come out!

It took no courage to organize the press conference. It took an
ego that seeks the spotlight. Many of the researchers on this
list have done quite a bit to expose the truth. Here I think of
Dick Hall's half century of dedication, Stan Friedman's constant
lectures, Budd Hopkins, John Mack, David Jacobs, et.al. (though
I disagree with their conclusions), John Velez, Jerry Clark,
Jenny Randles, Greg Sandow, Dennis Stacy, and so many others
(sorry about my short list here) who have done a great deal to
advance the cause, expose the fakes, and try to tell the truth.
Greer's efforts, because of how he has approached this, sets us
back. He seems more interested in gaining and holding the
spotlight than he does of getting the truth out there.

 >Many of you will probably have problems with what I've said but
 >I honestly feel that until we can all work together then
 >absolutely nothing will happen. I know none of us think exactly
 >the same but please think of the consequence of your actions
 >before you begin the "knee jerk" rubbishing.

I have thought about the consequences if we don't tell the truth
ourselves. In an academic arena, if the researcher, scientist,
author, investigator, came forward with a theory, it is the
responsibility of his and her peers to examine the claims and
point out the flaws. That is exactly what we are doing here. If
there were no flaws, then we should stand rank and file behind
Greer. However, we cannot ignore those flaws because they will
be discovered. If we expect ufology to grow into a real
"science" then we are obligated to point out the flaws in the
research. Until we learn that lesson, we are condemned to remain
a "fringe" science filled with bad information, charlatans, and
publicity seekers.

 >There's obviously a place for arguements and opinions but please
 >lets give a united front to the media and the public. If it
 >appears that we don't believe then how the hell can we possibly
 >begin to expect the people of the world the believe it too.

Yes, there is a place for argument, but remember, we are not
those who took it into the public arena. Had Greer asked for
advice, had he done his homework, and had he actually cared
about the truth, then this discussion would not be unnecessary.
Why should we support a platform that we know to be faulty? How
can we possibly begin to expect the people of the world to
believe it too if we knowing overlook the flawed data? Why
should they believe us when they learn that we knew more than we
were letting on?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                       Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:47:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:41:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hale


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 14:07:26 +0100

 >Ever heard of the adage "ask a stupid question, get a stupid
 >answer" ?

Dave

Ever heard of the word hypocrisy?

 >Either way, I printed your message off and took it down to
 >the Star office yesterday (I actually continue to work freelance
 >for them occasionally), and it raised a few laughs amongst the
 >hardened hacks.

Good to see that the hacks are still in their bubbles, it makes
them feel safe, bloody aliens... must be mad to think they're
coming here, ay!

 >As for your interest in my welfare, perhaps you ought to discuss
 >my reasons for leaving with my partner Carolyn who left at
 >precisely the same time (obviously as a result of the Max Burns
 >trial too!).

Not your welfare Dave, god you know how twist things. Who would
have guessed you were or are a journo? It was your statement on
how you are non-emotive on this subject, and are only interested
in why people think they exist. I feel you did not have this in
mind when you were debating the Sheffield case with Max. I lost
count how many times you ridiculed him.

 >I can report that we are both feeling much better after leaving
 >the world of cut-and-thrust journalism behind for a more genteel
 >existence writing freelance, teaching a university course and
 >pursuing academic research with a generous grant from HM
 >Government.

In your academia, I wish you well, but biographies are not
required on the List, just less hypocrisy.

 >Ten years reporting tedious court cases, council meetings,
 >inquests and industrial tribunals, pursuing confidence
 >tricksters, drug-dealers, dodgy car salesmen and teenaged
 >pregnant mothers... working an open-ended 7-day week with the
 >prospect of a call at any time of day or night from a news
 >editor demanding copy or another door-knock upon a family who
 >have just lost a loved one is quite enough for anyone.

And you have a cat called Felix, a dog called Rupert, a budgie
called Twinkle, you like putting your feet up on a Sunday
morning and like to read the papers with a cup of coffee, with a
couple of Rich Tea biscuits.

 >Given a chance to leave all that behind and "downsize" who
 >wouldn't take it?

I fully understand the put down of UFO research from your, dare
I say it, long and great journalistic background.

 >Compared to journalism the world of ufology is just a
 >teddy-bear's picnic.

So it was you who was down in the woods today, hope the honey
was up to it!

 >Try looking up the word "coincidence" in your dictionary Roy -
 >it will appear there.

You're right it is there, from start to finish on one case?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                   Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:03:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:44:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support - Felder


 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 02:11:10 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support


 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:52:08 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project Support

 >>>From: Darren Danks <darrend@blueyonder.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Disclosure Project Support
 >>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 07:44:39 +0100

  <snip>


 >Grab on to your panty hose with both hands, I'm about to agree
 >with you! (And the seas parted and the skies fell! <LOL>)

I am sorry to inform you that I am currently unavailable for
comment, pending cardiac resusitation following the heart attack
I just had. This just about tears it. The sky has fallen, hell
has frozen over, and donkeys do indeed fly.....

This also proves that nothing is impossible :)

 >That's not true Bobbie. I'm seeing a lot more unity in support
 >of _public_ hearings (not Greer) than I have ever seen among
 >ufologists.

Pardon me, but it _is_ true from my point of view, and the
perspective of a lot of "non-insider" types. _You_ may be privy
to more inside information regarding the minds and motivations
of ufologists in general, but that doesn't negate the opinions
of a lot of other folks who don't have that information on which
to formulate an informed opinion.

Which is why I suggested that the ufologists and "name"
researchers mount their counterattack in a public forum. If this
Greer dog-and-pony show is such a bad thing, then I don't
understand why those who are objecting so strenously aren't out
there publicly making these statements. Blasting someone on an
email list that caters to the UFO community isn't doing much to
enlighten those who are reading about this in mainstream
newspapers and hearing about it on cable.

Preaching to the choir may sound good, but it generally
doesn't accomplish much in the long run.

 >_Nobody_ has been more vocal than myself when it comes to
 >blowing the whistle on Greer. If _I_ am willing to put my
 >formidable differences with Greer aside in the name of
 >presenting a 'united front' to our elected officials in DC...
 >then nobody else even has an excuse! Not getting behind public
 >hearings would be like cutting your own nose to spite your face.

Exactly. Oh, my God! I just agreed with you. The world is
definitely coming to an end.

One doesn't have to support Greer to support the push for open
Congressional hearings. I think we are forgetting that, if those
hearings were conducted, Greer would not be in control of them.
Get the hearings, _then_ push to have reputable researchers give
testimony.

Right now, all this blasting of Greer is doing nothing but
making ufologists and researchers look like a bunch of whiney
cry-babies, and driving we the people right into Greer's camp.

If there is unity in support of public hearings, then let's see
that unity. Right now, we the people ain't seeing it.


Bobbie

Hoping to recover from her coronary... did someone say "Clear!"?



==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                       Re: OK How About This - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:13:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:46:58 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This - Felder


 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?


 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: OK How About This....?



 >That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
 >discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
 >continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
 >Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
 >Bobbie.

You hit the nail on the head here, dude..the crux of the problem.
You are preaching to the choir...."large UFO savvy audience".
_That_ is the problem! Greer's little press conference _did not_
preach to the choir. He got the attention of people who don't
even have internet access!

Example: my mother heard about Greer's press conference on the
radio here. She hasn't heard a single _word_ that anyone else
has said on the subject of Greer or disclosure or UFOs or
anything because she _does not have internet access_!!

Greer reached her, though. You and EBK and all those who have
the most sincere motives and intentions at heart have _not_
reached her, nor have you reached any of the others that have
heard about Greer's press conference on the tv or radio, or read
about it in the newspaper.

_That_ is the point I'm trying to make!

Greer hit an audience that the internet UFO community doesn't
touch. And you aren't going to counter his influence on that
enormously large group of people on a world-wide basis by
writing emails on an E-Mail List.

Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Re: OK How About This....? - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:29:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:48:36 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - Felder


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:38:36 -0700


 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: OK How About This....?

<snip>

 >What earthly
 >good would it be to do a press conference after the 15 minute
 >attention spans have been broken up and herded in to a new,
 >greener, pasture.

If this Greer and Co. Show isn't going to hold the attention of
the "average Joe" for more than 15 minutes, then why all the
hoopla about the damage that this is doing to ufology in
general, how poor an example of a ufologist Greer is, etc?  Why
not just let the whole thing die a natural death from lack of
interest?

Why not just ignore the man, let him fade away after his 15
minutes of fame, and allow things to resume the usual status quo
of the ufo community/industry/whatever you want to call it?

Just trying to figure it all out....


Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:08:35 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:52:49 -0400
Subject: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!


For some of you on this List who apparently wish so badly to
have hearings that it doesn't matter how you get there ("the end
justifies the means"), I say you had better understand the
hidden agendas here. Clear political agendas emerged at the
meetings, and the pushers are using UFOs for political purposes.
No way will hearings result from their approach.

Confusing is it? Then either learn to trust those of us who have
the knowledge and experience, or spend less time opinionizing on
this site and more time investigating for yourself. If you have
access to the internet, you have access to rich sources of
information.

Putting UFOs in the context of military and scientific politics,
pseudoscience, and New Age blather, as these people are doing,
does nothing (nada! zilch!) to promote hearings. It just isn't
going to happen via these shell game operators.

Start using a search engine or two to obtain information about
Greer, Alfred Webre (who has emerged as a primary information
contact point), and Daniel Sheehan (who is also emerging as one
of the intellectual "leaders"). Sheehan is a well-known
idealist, leftist public interest lawyer and strong
conspiratorialist (as is Webre, who has stated that the late
election was rigged by covert forces as a "destabilization"
operation by installing Bush in power).

Sheehan, so far as I know right now, has a more respectable
record though his career has been rather strange, and I flat out
don't believe his story in the 1970s about going to "a new wing
of the National Archives which had armed guards stationed at the
entrance" (there ain't no such animal") and being shown secret
photos of crashed saucers, a secret report on visiting aliens,
etc.

The first two have web sites. I found information and even audio
recordings of Sheehan's UFO-related talks, track records, and
publications, including books. Check your library and
interlibrary loan if necessary.

For openers, read the article about Greer in September 1994
Outside Magazine (400 Market Street, Santa Fe, NM 87501)
entitled "Alien Brothers Come On Down!" And please don't be so
naive as to think that people of this ilk can ever be trusted to
lead anything except their own private agendas, or that
Congressional staff members are too stupid to recognize
unreliable witnesses. They vett witnesses all the time.

And for Bobbie, as G.T. said, you just don't get
counter-attention without having legitimate news, except by
sensationalism. It is much easier said than done to hold such a
conference, and somebody put up a lot of money (which we don't
have) to pay for this one. It also takes a lot of time and
energy, and almost all of us have to work for a living.

I wish some investigative reporters would "follow the money
trail" of Greer and this conference, and we might learn
something worthwhile.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                        Re: OK How About This - Geib

From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:01:13 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:10:11 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This - Geib


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:13:44 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This

 >>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?


 >>That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
 >>discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
 >>continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
 >>Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
 >>Bobbie.

 >You hit the nail on the head here, dude..the crux of the problem.
 >You are preaching to the choir...."large UFO savvy audience".
 >_That_ is the problem! Greer's little press conference _did not_
 >preach to the choir. He got the attention of people who don't
 >even have internet access!

 >Example: my mother heard about Greer's press conference on the
 >radio here. She hasn't heard a single _word_ that anyone else
 >has said on the subject of Greer or disclosure or UFOs or
 >anything because she _does not have internet access_!!

 >Greer reached her, though. You and EBK and all those who have
 >the most sincere motives and intentions at heart have _not_
 >reached her, nor have you reached any of the others that have
 >heard about Greer's press conference on the tv or radio, or read
 >about it in the newspaper.

 >_That_ is the point I'm trying to make!

 >Greer hit an audience that the internet UFO community doesn't
 >touch. And you aren't going to counter his influence on that
 >enormously large group of people on a world-wide basis by
 >writing emails on an E-Mail List.


Boy Bob, you did hit it on the head!

This is a great List, but still a List with limited audience.

Greer has gotten his message out beyond the email communities
and beyond the websites. I have noticed with dismay, that for
all those that criticize Greer (as should be) I have never seen
anyone try to do it better.

How come?

Why is it that Greer gets this far and no one else does?

There certainly seems to be plenty of noble ideas floating
around this List, but not much action.


Best of all worlds

Dan








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:02:44 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:13:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Aubeck


 >From: Scott Sadowski <scotty_s@swbell.net>
 >Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 09:13:10 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:04:46 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - Sadowski


 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 20:30:26 -0400
 >>From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >>Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions
 >>To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Christian Experts On Abductions - "FallenAngels"
 >>>Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:14:22 -0600

 >>I'm not trying to turn this into a debate between the New Age
 >>and mainstream ("fire and brimstone") Christian
 >>interpretations,
 >>etc.

 >>I've just been curious for a while now how a person can claim
 >>be a Bible-believing Christian, which includes all that
 >>stuff, and still believe that alleged ET's are purely natural,
 >>intelligent beings from another planet that somehow made their
 >>way over here - all of which directly implies, to me, that the
 >>J-C God is allowing ET to potentially muck with his End Times
 >>plans for Humanity.

 >>How do you reconcile these views?

 >How is there any difference between the more intelligent E.T.s
 >"mucking" about with us and "His End Times plans for Humanity"
 >and our more intelligent missionaries "mucking" about with the
 >less civilized peoples of the Central and South Americas and
 >Africa and "His End Times plans for their Humanity"? Is it just
 >because we are all terrestrial? To God, I would imagine that the
 >universe is all terrestrial and the E.T.s are just missionaries
 >enlightening us as we are "supposedly" enlightening the
 >"Heathens" in the underdeveloped countries.

Hi guys,

I've been following this debate on and off since it began.
Really I don't see any need to seek a new theological
justification for the Christian-Extraterrestrial viewpoint. A
bit of historical awareness is all that's needed here.

Let's not forget that pluralism (i.e. the plurality of worlds)
has been studied continuously by Christian scholars for nearly
two thousand years, beginning with Hippolytus of Rome (3rd
century) and Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD). The development of
Christian thought on this matter can be traced right up to this
century, which should prepare us for _any_ sane or lunatic
rantings about such issues coming from the clergy.

After 1750 the theory that the universe was populated throughout
by humanoid beings was seen as a demonstration of God's
boundless creativity, not as a threat to dogma. This is one
reason why the Church always showed an active interest in
pluralism, but not the only reason.

On the question of abductions the same can be said. Abductions
by demonic creatures (and hybrid offspring, implants, screen
memories, sky travel, bedroom visitations in general etc.) have
been debated for almost 2000 years by Christians. If we look
into other traditions (Islamic, etc.)we find more or less the
same kettle of fish.

I am not Christian, nor do I believe in any other deity or
pertain to a sect, but I do think Christianity has the same or
greater right to speculate about UFOs as the ufological
community. There seem to be great scholars and weird lunatics in
both parties, though I think the priests still outnumber us on
both scores.

Let's not show our ignorance by mocking theirs.


Chris Aubeck











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:47:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:10:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch


 >From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:11:55 +0100
 >Subject: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >Hi List,

 >I was just browsing the NICAP website, and came upon the
 >following "flying saucer" illustration taken from a US Air Force
 >Manual (AFM 200-3, Chapter 9, Page 3) see:

 >http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/manual.htm

 >There does not seem to be a date referenced on the website as to
 >when this manual was first published. I'm sure some list members
 >will be familiar with this illustration, though - so has anyone
 >got more information on it?


Hello again Dave!

I apparently missed the point of your query above.

I did a quick browse (Altavista, usually pretty comprehensive)
but only found one listing for "AFM 200-3".

This is about a new mil policy oddly called:

Document Title: JP 3-50.3 Joint Doctrine for Evasion and
Recovery

The one-page summary merely says that JP 3-50.5
replaces/supercedes AFM 200-3 and some other documents.  Here
is the URL:

http://searchpdf.adobe.com/proxies/1/48/72/83.html

Perhaps further browsing by document number will turn up more on
some other browser.

Best (and sorry)

- 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:40:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:10:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch


 >From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:11:55 +0100
 >Subject: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >Hi List,

 >I was just browsing the NICAP website, and came upon the
 >following "flying saucer" illustration taken from a US Air Force
 >Manual (AFM 200-3, Chapter 9, Page 3) see:

 >http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/manual.htm

 >There does not seem to be a date referenced on the website as to
 >when this manual was first published. I'm sure some list members
 >will be familiar with this illustration, though - so has anyone
 >got more information on it?



Hello Dave:

Sorry I cannot provide any further info on the source
of the picture. Chances are it was a drawing thrown
together to illustrate a point, rather than any careful
representation of a real object.

I seem to sense a bit of tongue-in-cheek on the part of
the writers of the AFM 200-3 manual. Classic UFOs as
a "technological surprise". Little bits of dry humor
may pop up even in an American military manual. Lets
not forget the bathing beauties 'mistakenly' slipped
into an otherwise dry military slide-presentation. It
kicks up some adrenaline to keep the troops from nodding
off, and the same might apply to an otherwise dull
technical manual.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                 Re: Space - A Military Priority - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:44:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:11:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Space - A Military Priority - Maccabee


 >From: Osley Dias <osley@bigpond.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Space - A Military Priority
 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 01:47:08 +1000


 >Looks like Space has become a "military" priority...

Not "has become," but rather "always has been" starting in 1957
at Sputnik 1.

Satellites for geodesy needed for improved ballistic missile
guidance have been used, along with survceillance satellites,
since the early '60's.

<snip>

 >the question needs to be asked -  is space really "civilian" or
 >"military"?

Both.

Would citizens go to war to preserve their satellite TV,
satellite phone connections, satellite weather reports, etc.?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:53:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:11:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

<snip>

 >Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
 >_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
 >is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
 >In other words you could have a code word security clearance
 >with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
 >Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
 >classification level.

 >The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >access to AF UFO files.

Robert,

If true, this would be very good evidence that MJ-12 is not what
you believe it to be.

If the puppet master can't control the puppet, what is he the
master of?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

              Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:46:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:12:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:08:35 -0000

 >For some of you on this List who apparently wish so badly to
 >have hearings that it doesn't matter how you get there ("the end
 >justifies the means"), I say you had better understand the
 >hidden agendas here. Clear political agendas emerged at the
 >meetings, and the pushers are using UFOs for political purposes.
 >No way will hearings result from their approach.

 >Confusing is it? Then either learn to trust those of us who have
 >the knowledge and experience, or spend less time opinionizing on
 >this site and more time investigating for yourself. If you have
 >access to the internet, you have access to rich sources of
 >information.

 >Putting UFOs in the context of military and scientific politics,
 >pseudoscience, and New Age blather, as these people are doing,
 >does nothing (nada! zilch!) to promote hearings. It just isn't
 >going to happen via these shell game operators.

 >Start using a search engine or two to obtain information about
 >Greer, Alfred Webre (who has emerged as a primary information
 >contact point), and Daniel Sheehan (who is also emerging as one
 >of the intellectual "leaders"). Sheehan is a well-known
 >idealist, leftist public interest lawyer and strong
 >conspiratorialist (as is Webre, who has stated that the late
 >election was rigged by covert forces as a "destabilization"
 >operation by installing Bush in power).

 >Sheehan, so far as I know right now, has a more respectable
 >record though his career has been rather strange, and I flat out
 >don't believe his story in the 1970s about going to "a new wing
 >of the National Archives which had armed guards stationed at the
 >entrance" (there ain't no such animal") and being shown secret
 >photos of crashed saucers, a secret report on visiting aliens,
 >etc.

 >The first two have web sites. I found information and even audio
 >recordings of Sheehan's UFO-related talks, track records, and
 >publications, including books. Check your library and
 >interlibrary loan if necessary.

 >For openers, read the article about Greer in September 1994
 >Outside Magazine (400 Market Street, Santa Fe, NM 87501)
 >entitled "Alien Brothers Come On Down!" And please don't be so
 >naive as to think that people of this ilk can ever be trusted to
 >lead anything except their own private agendas, or that
 >Congressional staff members are too stupid to recognize
 >unreliable witnesses. They vett witnesses all the time.

 >And for Bobbie, as G.T. said, you just don't get
 >counter-attention without having legitimate news, except by
 >sensationalism. It is much easier said than done to hold such a
 >conference, and somebody put up a lot of money (which we don't
 >have) to pay for this one. It also takes a lot of time and
 >energy, and almost all of us have to work for a living.

 >I wish some investigative reporters would "follow the money
 >trail" of Greer and this conference, and we might learn
 >something worthwhile.


Second!

For those who say, at least Greer is doing >something.< Please
note, that Dick Hall has been doing >something< for over forty
years. A few examples, perhaps:

1. Met with the Argentine officials for suggestion on how to
conduct their UFO invesigations.

2. Contacted numerous scientists during the NICAP era and
recruited over 200 to sign a statement supporting serious study
of the phenomena. One scientist recruited was Carlton Coon, a
real achievement.

3. Prepared briefings for members of Congress in which the
reliability of the individuals sited were of the highest
standards. Not unvetted witnesses with serious reliability
problems as in the case of some of Greer's witnesses.

4. Obtained and archived vast quanities of UFO material.

That's just for starters.

IF people wanted good information on UFOs, there would be a huge
demand for Loren Gross' books. IF people wanted to know about
government involvement, Barry Greenwood's efforts wouldn't have
garnered just shoestring support.

However, it seems that many here like people who promise big,
but whose track record is pretty sorry rather than people who
continue to plug away and accumulate one small piece after
another. The big talkers get the attention and generally deliver
nothing. "But at least, they are doing something!"

Yep, serving their own cause.

There is no magic wand which we give "The Answer." What is
required is a lot of painstaking work.

Jan Aldrich






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                     Re: OK How About This...? - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:22:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:12:27 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Felder


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:03 EDT
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: OK How About This....?

<snip>

 >And why should I hang myself out to dry when the majority of
 >the UFO community is not going to believe what I say because
 >they don't like the message.

Kevin, List:

If you don't want to hang yourself out to dry in the process of
doing your level best to give we the people nobodies out here
the truth behind the UFO question, then that's your choice. But
I don't understand why anyone is getting so upset and pissed off
because Greer did _not_ mind hanging himself out to dry and
doing what he wanted to do.

I agree that people don't want to hear it. They like the stories
about military subterfuge and covert government operations and
cute little aliens trying to save the planet and reptilitan stud
muffins making nightly visits to some singing bimbo. I think
you're right about that. But the fact remains that a man of
Greer's highly questionable credibility _did_ hang himself out
to dry, and he's not drying out. And bitching about him and what
he did on a bunch of E-mail Lists isn't going to change that.

<snip>

 >I could go on, but we refuse to police ourselves, so what would
 >be the point. We have the evidence about these people and if we
 >mention it, then suddenly we become the bad guys out to destroy
 >ufology just because we have told the truth. We are called
 >jealous because we didn't get invited to participate in Greer's
 >circus and when we do post information suggesting problems, we
 >are attacked as "big name" ufologists who are jealous.

Again, you are correct. There is no policing of the UFO field,
no unity among the name researchers and noted ufologists. And
that is exactly why a man like Greer has captured the attention
of we the people. Whether he is actually accomplishing anything
or not, he at least is giving the _appearance_ that he is. And
since we the people aren't interested in fact and data and
truth, according to this post of yours, we the people are
gravitating toward Greer and losing faith in the ufologists and
researchers we've looked up to all these years.

But we the people aren't quite as dumb as we seem. Left alone,
this whole Greer thing would have died a natural death in time.
We the people would have figured out he ain't delivering on all
the hype. We the people would have remembered that this is the
same man who thinks he can whistle and a UFO will plop down in
his back yard. Left alone, this would have been another
lame-brain headline grabbing sensationalist that we the people
eventually lose interest in. But all the whining and bitching
and flaming that is taking place all over the internet is
_exactly_ what is adding fuel to Greer's fire!

I just think that there can be support for the push for open,
Congressional hearings without all the flaming and attacking and
posturing. From the non-ufologist side of things, which is where
I'm sitting, this looks like it has turned into a glorified
pissing contest. It goes back to the old addage: if you want
respect, act respectable. If you want credibility, act credible.

<snip>

 >So, once again, would be the whole point? You have the data, but
 >you would rather accuse of us something evil rather than believe
 >that Greer's press conference is doomed and we'll get splashed
 >with the debris. The question that should be asked is if Greer
 >can call down flying saucers, why not show the press one of
 >those rather than several people whose military credentials are
 >less than perfect.

I'm not accusing you of anything, Kevin. I'm just trying to get
you... meaning ufologists and researchers... to understand that
you are basically shooting yourselves in the foot with all this
negative discussion regarding Greer. The only complaints I'm
seeing regarding Greer and Co. are on Lists where ufologists and
known researchers are subscribed. I'm just trying to get you to
understand that people are looking at the UFO community as a
whole right now, and it is coming up looking like a bunch of
whiney cry-babies because of all of this sort of negative stuff!
Duh!

The point is that Greer and Co. need to be countered. But this
Greer-bashing isn't doing it... it is having the opposite effect
around the internet. And it isn't touching anyone _beyond_ the
internet that I can see.

I don't have the answers, dude. But I would hope that those who
are serious about the respect and credibility of the UFO field
would put their heads together and come up with something better
in the way of a rebuttal to Greer and Co. than to flame him and
his witnesses on email Lists.

BTW... one question... when you say this:

 >You have the data, but you would rather accuse of us something
 >evil rather than believe that Greer's press conference is doomed
 >and we'll get splashed with the debris.

You're not insinuating guilt by association would come into play
here, are you? :)


Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                        Re: OK How About This - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:35:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:14:45 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This - Velez


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:13:44 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This

 >>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?

 >>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: OK How About This....?

Hi Bobbie, hi All,

I wrote:

 >>That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
 >>discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
 >>continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
 >>Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
 >>Bobbie.

Bobbie responds:

 >You hit the nail on the head here, dude..the crux of the problem.
 >You are preaching to the choir...."large UFO savvy audience".
 >_That_ is the problem! Greer's little press conference _did not_
 >preach to the choir. He got the attention of people who don't
 >even have internet access!

You dramatically underestimate the reach of both this List and
'Strange Days... Indeed'. As well as the composition of its
audience.

1. 'Strange Days... Indeed' program originates at CFRB in
Toronto. CFRB is Canada's most listened to _50,000_ watt AM
_radio_ station (covers a lot of real estate.) And 'Strange
Days... Indeed' holds the number 3 spot in the ratings for its
time slot. (Reaches a lot of people) Not to mention the Internet
audience. Did you ever try to log onto the CFRB server after the
program has started? That sucker (server) goes to capacity as
soon as the clock passes 10 PM and Errol is on the air with
SDI. ;)

"Non-UFO" people, folks all over Canada and the Northeastern US
are tuning in. Errol gets calls from many 'newbies' as well as
from those who are well versed in the subject. Ghod only knows
how many folks that are driving home in their cars are listening
in. The point is, we _do_ reach a lot of people. Both UFO savvy
and not - alike. More people than you'd think. (Or that you'd
would like to give credit for. ;)

2. UFO UpDates posts are circulated and re-posted to Lists all
over the planet. I have received correspondence from just about
every corner of the globe in response to some UpDates posting or
other that I had made. All posts are archived at the UFOmind
website which happens to be a _busy_ (often visited) Internet
site. Then there's the 'word of mouth' that I'm sure accounts
for further dissemination of information.

SDI and this List reach a lot more people (both on the Internet
and off) than you think Bobbie. Besides, I'm not interested in
"reaching vast numbers." I figure that anybody that 'God
intends' to hear my words, will hear them. Although you
obviously don't agree, I think I/we already reach all
the people I/we need to reach.

(With the notable exception of your mom of course!)  <VBG>

John Velez ;)

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                        Re: OK How About This - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 05:10:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:15:06 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This - Hatch


 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:01:13 GMT

 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:13:44 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This

 >>>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?

 >>>That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
 >>>discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
 >>>continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
 >>>Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
 >>>Bobbie.

 >>You hit the nail on the head here, dude..the crux of the problem.
 >>You are preaching to the choir...."large UFO savvy audience".
 >>_That_ is the problem! Greer's little press conference _did not_
 >>preach to the choir. He got the attention of people who don't
 >>even have internet access!

 >>Example: my mother heard about Greer's press conference on the
 >>radio here. She hasn't heard a single _word_ that anyone else
 >>has said on the subject of Greer or disclosure or UFOs or
 >>anything because she _does not have internet access_!!

 >>Greer reached her, though. You and EBK and all those who have
 >>the most sincere motives and intentions at heart have _not_
 >>reached her, nor have you reached any of the others that have
 >>heard about Greer's press conference on the tv or radio, or read
 >>about it in the newspaper.

 >>_That_ is the point I'm trying to make!

 >>Greer hit an audience that the internet UFO community doesn't
 >>touch. And you aren't going to counter his influence on that
 >>enormously large group of people on a world-wide basis by
 >>writing emails on an E-Mail List.

 >Boy Bob, you did hit it on the head!

 >This is a great List, but still a List with limited audience.

 >Greer has gotten his message out beyond the email communities
 >and beyond the websites. I have noticed with dismay, that for
 >all those that criticize Greer (as should be) I have never seen
 >anyone try to do it better.

 >How come?

 >Why is it that Greer gets this far and no one else does?

 >There certainly seems to be plenty of noble ideas floating
 >around this List, but not much action.



Hello Dan:


Why don't the serioyus people create a media splash?

Look what some people are asking.

Either the "serious" people can buzz the press, present
extremely questionable witnesses etc., in other words act just
like Greer, or they can call up a big news conference with
nothing more than "here is what I think based on statistics,
maps, piles of reports .. " i.e. everything everybody already
knows.

If and when serious ufology has something really solid to
present, some proof and not just evidence, only then should the
serious people step forward. To do otherwise is to make this
study a public laughing stock, more than it would be otherwise
that is.

There are a number of people trying to do better; quietly
digging thru archives, attacking UFO mysteries from all angles,
trying to find some proof or at least better evidence and
information.

Does anyone seriously expect them to make a huge splashy
presentation before they have anything new to present?


Best

- Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                      Corso And The Shickshinny Knights

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 13:57:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:15:55 -0400
Subject: Corso And The Shickshinny Knights


Back in 1997, I got a message mentioning Corso and his
connection to the Shickshinny Knights. I have since lost the
message, however, I believe his information came from this
source

"Saucers, Secrets and Shickshinny Knights" by Marvin Davis

http://www2.prestel.co.uk/church/lumpen/saucers.htm

I have not followed this up, but came upon this article by
accident. A Catholic couple in Pennsylvania told me years ago
that were given information about the 'Knights of Malta' which
they took to be a Church organization. They were shocked to
learn that it was trading on this name and was a political
organization.


Jan Aldrich










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:00:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:16:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 ><snip>

 >Dennis wrote:

 >>More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >>Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >>denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >>Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >>would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >>- that should be your job.)

 >>Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >>leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >>with yours?

 >Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
 >_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
 >is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
 >In other words you could have a code word security clearance
 >with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
 >Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
 >classification level.

 >The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >access to AF UFO files.


Hi Robert, Dennis, List,

I must step in here and side with Dennis on this issue.

The Blue Book files did not have codeword access controls. More
importantly, according to the (fraudulent) MJ-12 Eisenhower
Briefing Document, Blue Book had liaison with the MJ-12
Committee and Menzel is named as a member.

Therefore, with liaison between Blue Book and MJ-12 there is no
possibility whatsoever that an MJ-12 member - if MJ-12 really
existed as claimed in the (fraudulent) EBD - could not gain
access to BB documents which were not compartmented or
access-controlled.

The fact that Menzel had to use subterfuge to get copies of BB
files for his Flying saucers book because Ruppelt blocked his
access is proof that Menzel was not a member of the MJ-12
described in the EBD.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                                 Greer Bits

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:04:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:16:38 -0400
Subject: Greer Bits


The following is an example of the sort of thing making the
rounds on the internet regarding Greer and Co. I pass it along
FYI.

Bobbie

____________________________

From: scissors5@hotmail.com
Mailing-List: list discuss-ufo@yahoogroups.com; contact discuss-
ufo-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list discuss-ufo@yahoogroups.com
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:discuss-ufo-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:45:28 -0000
Subject: [discuss-ufo] A Call to Action!



Office Memorandum - United States Government

Date: March 22, 1950

To: Director, FBI

From: Guy Hottel, SAC, Washington

Subject: Flying Saucers
    Information concerning

The following information was furnished to SA [censored] by
[censored]. An investigator of the Air Force stated that three
so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico. They
were described as being circular in shape with raised centers,
approximately 50 feet in diameter. Each one was occupied by
three bodies of human shape but only 3 feet tall, dressed in
metallic cloth of a very fine texture. Each body was bandaged
in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers
and test pilots.

According to Mr. [censored], informant, the saucers were found
in New Mexico due to the fact that the government has a very
high-powered radar set-up in that area and it is believed the
radar interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucers.

No further evaluation was attempted by SA [censored] concerning
the above.

--FBI Memo downloaded from the FBI Freedom of Information
website

______________________

The above is just one of the many documents Dr. Steven Greer is
presenting to the press and to members of Congress along with
the testimony of dozens of highly credible witnesses in an
effort to disclose the truth about UFOs and suppressed energy
technology which would resolve the energy crisis. CNN's coverage
of the press conference can be seen at

http://cseti.homesite.net:7071/ramgen/disclosurecnnsm.rm

with Real Player G2.

The ultimate national security issue is intimately linked to the
pressing environmental crisis facing the world today: This issue
is the question of whether or not humanity can continue as a
technologically advanced civilization. Fossil fuels and the
internal combustion engine are non-sustainable both environ-
mentally and economically - and a replacement for both already
exists.

Dr Greer and his team have identified insiders and scientists
who can prove, in open Congressional hearings, that we do in
fact possess classified energy generation and anti-gravity
propulsion systems capable of completely and permanently
replacing all forms of currently used energy generation and
transportation systems. These devices access the ambient
electromagnetic and so-called zero point energy state to produce
vast amounts of energy without any pollution.

This means that such systems do not require fuel to burn or
atoms to split or fuse. They do no require central power plants,
transmission lines and the related multi-trillion dollar
infrastructure required to electrify and power remote areas of
India, China, Africa and Latin America. These systems are
site-specific: they can be set up at any place and generate
needed energy. Essentially, this constitutes the definitive
solution to the vast majority of environmental problems facing
our world.

Fax or mail (do not send e-mail as those are discarded) your two
senators and representative of Congress requesting congressional
hearings and pass this on to everyone you know. The FAX number
and address of your senators and congressman or congresswoman
can be found at:

http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index_by_state.cfm

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

(Be sure to click on the links that will provide the FAX number
and address, sending mail via the Internet will go unnoticed.)

A SAMPLE LETTER TO CONGRESS IS AT THE END OF THIS E-MAIL.

You can also sign the on-line petition:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Disclose/petition.html


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

The news media is listening:


"Panels of experts" are nothing new in Washington, but when a
panel of experts says UFOs are real, it tends to raise a few
eyebrows. Today at the National Press Club, representatives from
the Disclosure Project gathered to demand Congressional hearings
to settle the UFO question.

--"Panel Calls for Congressional UFO Hearings," ABC 7 WJLA-TV,
May 9th, 2001


Dr. Steven Greer leads the group of military and scientific
witnesses who make up the American Disclosure project. The
organisation hopes to open congressional hearings on UFO and
extra-terrestrial sightings.

--"UFOs: Do They Really Exist?" Euronews, May 10th, 2001


Since December, Greer has deposed more than 100 witnesses and
logged over 120 hours of tape in his search for proof that
aliens are, or have been, among us.

--"Men in Suits See Aliens as Part of Solution, Not Problem,"
FOX News, May 10th, 2001


The message here was that credible people - people who are not
kooks - believe that UFO contain aliens. These people have good
resumes. Maybe that's not as impressive as someone coming
forward with an actual alien antenna, but it's not trivial.

--"Aliens and UFOs: The Likely Scenario," Washington Post, May
9th, 2001


They got to their feet one at a time, taking their turn at the
microphone and unburdening themselves of their stories. They
then sat down to rapturous applause. Confession is never easy.
When you are confessing to strangers that you believe you have
witnessed UFOs, it is even more difficult... . "A number of
members of Congress have told us privately that this is the way
it has to happen - for people to take the initiative," said a
spokeswoman. "These [witnesses] are highly credible. They used
to be trusted with nuclear weapons. Why would they not be
trusted to believe what they saw with their own eyes?"

--"Confessions of a UFO Spotter: We Don't Want a War in Space,"
Independent News, May 10th, 2001


Dan Morris, a retired Air Force Master Sergeant, spoke
emotionally about seeing and photographing three UFOs while
working at a radar site in Georgia... . There are many
unexplained incidents. From 1947 through 1969 the Air Force
investigated UFOs under a program called Project Blue Book. The
project is seen by some, and was mentioned specifically by
Morris, as an effort to divert or discredit evidence of UFOs.
But even the Air Force was not able to explain everything.
According to an Air Force fact sheet on Blue Book, 701 of the
12,618 sightings studied remained mysterious after nearly 20
years of effort.

--"Private Project Pushes for UFO Hearings," United Press
International, May 10th, 2001


"I became part of a group that would investigate, gather
information, and in the beginning it was still under Blue Book,
Snowbird and different covert programs. I would go interview
people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince
them they hadn't seen something or that they were hallucinating.
Well, if that didn't work, another team would come in and give
all the threats. And threaten them and their family and so on
and so forth. And they would be in charge of discrediting them,
making them look foolish and so on and so forth. Now if that
didn't work, then there was another team that put an end to that
problem, one way or another."

--A Master Sergeant of the US Air Force and NRO Operative


Apart from witness testimony, which includes retired officials
from most branches of the military and the Federal Aviation
Administration, former astronauts Edgar Mitchell and Gordon
Cooper will appear via video, both claiming to have firsthand
knowledge of UFOs. Mr. Mitchell flew on Apollo 14 and was the
sixth man to walk on the moon. In his testimony, he'll claim
extraterrestrial beings have not only landed on Earth, but the
United States has recovered crashed alien craft and bodies.

--"Inside the Beltway; E.T. phone W," The Washington Times, May
7th, 2001


Steven Greer of The Disclosure Project said, "in reality the
subject is laughed at because it is so serious. I have had grown
men weep who are in the pentagon, who are members of congress
who have said to me what are we going to do?"

--"The Disclosure Project," NBC, May 10th, 2001

It was surely the strangest ever news conference hosted by
Washington's... National Press Club. Donna Hare was just one of
over 20 witnesses, most of them ex-military, and all deadly
serious. Among them was former Army Sergeant Clifford Stone, who
said the US Government had tried to suppress what he had seen
one strange day in Pennsylvania, back in 1969. "I was involved
in situations where we actually did recoveries of crashed
saucers. There were bodies that were involved with some of these
crashes. Also some of these were alive," he said. "While we were
dong this, we were telling the American public there was nothing
to it. We were telling the world there was nothing to it," Mr.
Stone added.

--"UFO Spotters Slam 'US cover-up'," BBC News, May 10th 2001


Greer said extraterrestrials could provide a new, plentiful
source of energy that would provide the world's energy needs.

--"Group Calls for Disclosure of UFO Info," ABCNEWS, May 10th,
2001


"Technologies connected to UFO and extraterrestrial vehicles -
if declassified and used for peaceful energy generation and
propulsion - would solve the looming energy crisis definitively,
would end global warming, would correct the environmental
challenges that the earth is facing," Greer said.

--"UFO Group Wants X-Files Opened," MSN News, May 10th, 2001

***

Help make Congress listen, too.

http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index_by_state.cfm

http://www.house.gov/writerep/


For more information, go to the Disclosure Project website:

http://www.disclosureproject.org


To see the actual press conference in its entirety, go to:

http://www.connectlive.com/events/disclosureproject/

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

SAMPLE LETTER TO CONGRESS:


Dear (Specific Senator or Representative),

The recorded testimony of scores of military, government and
other witnesses to Unidentified Flying Objects and
Extraterrestrial events and projects from around the world
establishes the existence of a UFO / Extraterrestrial presence
on and around Earth. This recorded testimony consists of dozens
of first-hand, often top-secret witnesses to UFO and
Extraterrestrial events, internal UFO-related government
projects and covert activities, space-based weapons programs,
and covert, reverse-engineered energy and propulsion system
projects. The technologies that are of an Extraterrestrial
origin, when publicly released within a planned transition
period, will provide solutions to global environmental and
security challenges.

These numerous recorded witnesses constitute only a small
portion of a vast pool of identified present or former military,
intelligence, corporate, aviator, flight control, law
enforcement officers, scientists and other witnesses, who will
come forward when subpoenaed to testify at Congressional
hearings. Without a grant of immunity releasing them from their
security oaths, many such unimpeachable witnesses fear to speak
out.

The legislation to ban space-based weapons will prohibit acts of
war against Extraterrestrial civilizations, which have proven to
be concerned about our nuclear and weapons industry, but also
have proven they are not to be hostile. The comprehensive
legislation will transform the terrestrial war industry into a
world cooperative military (without space weapons), civil, and
commercial space industry. This will provide unprecedented
benefits and opportunities to all on Earth and in space.

Our generation of voters and leaders are responsible for this
once in a lifetime decision - to ban space-based weapons so that
we will be permitted to join the peaceful travelers in the
universe.

Therefore, I ask that you sponsor, enact and actively support
each of the following:

1. To hold open, comprehensive, secrecy-free hearings to take
military/agency witness testimony on events and evidence
relating to an Extraterrestrial presence on and around Earth.

2. To hold open hearings on advanced energy and propulsion
systems, relating to extraterrestrial phenomena that, when
publicly released, will provide solutions to global
environmental challenges. These technologies which may now be
sequestered behind the National Security Act.

3. To enact legislation which will ban all space-based weapons,
and to enact and implement international treaty and legal
standards prohibiting the weaponization of space.

4. To enact comprehensive legislation to research, develop and
explore space peacefully and cooperatively with all cultures on
Earth and in space.

Sincerely,

[Signature]

[Your full name typed]
[Title, if appropriate]
[Address]
[City, State, Zip]
[Phone number]




==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:40:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:20:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sparks


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:43:45 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:16:21 -0700

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 17:16:44 -0300

 >>>>Or, at the very least, there would be some reference to outside
 >>>>pressure. But there's nothing of the sort. If Corso went to the
 >>>>FBI saying the kind of things he put in his book about the Cuban
 >>>>missile crisis, it's no wonder the FBI had trouble with him.

 >>See my reply to Greg.

 >>>There are other serious problems with Lieutenant Colonel Corso's
 >>>claims, such as his falsely claiming in a sworn statement to
 >>>attorney Peter Gersten that he had been a member of the National
 >>>Security Council.

 >>I have not seen that statement. I believe he wrote that he was
 >>Ike's military advisor to the NSC. In the introduction, Strom
 >>Thurmond wrote: "Corso had also spent four years working at the
 >>NSC". The facts may be a little confusing but as you point out,
 >>Col. Corso did not have the opportunity to correct the obvious
 >>flaws he found. I also know that John Alexander checked out Col.
 >>Corso's credentials and found them AOK.

<snip>

Corso's military records show that in 1954-6 he was assigned to
the staff of the OCB (Operations Coordinating Board) _not_ the
NSC - these were two separate agencies.

The OCB was established as an independent agency by Executive
Order 10483 on Sept 2, 1953, and was soon stripped of its major
responsibilities while Corso was there, then merged/abolished a
year after he left for Ft. Bliss.

There is no official documentation I have seen anywhere showing
Corso as working for the NSC and certainly not as a Member of
the Council itself -- which would mean he'd have to be a Cabinet
secretary such as the Secretary of Defense, or the Vice
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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                           The Watchdog - 05-1401

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:54:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:24:13 -0400
Subject: The Watchdog - 05-1401


UFO Skeptics - http://www.ufoworld.co.uk


ListBot Sponsor

UFOWATCHDOG.COM http://www.ufowatchdog.com "Don't Trip On Your
Open Mind"

***NEWS*** http://www.ufowatchdog.com/news.html

~ My Look At Disclosure - Commentary by Don Ecker ~ Astronaut
Edgar Mitchell Unhappy About Greer Using His Name ~ 1950 FOIA
Document on Recovered UFOs, EBEs ~ First Crop Circle of 2001 ~
UFO Claim Slips Away

***OF INTEREST***

Disclosure Debate: Did the recent Disclosure Project help or
hinder? Send your comments to ufowatchdog@earthlink.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 14

                              Just Think Of It

From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:03:15 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:25:50 -0400
Subject: Just Think Of It


First off I am not posting to defend mr Greer and no, I don�t
have all the answers But it seems to me that that the reality is
that Greer:

1. Brought major media attention to a most often taboo subject
2. Received international  attention
3. Was able to get genuine individuals to make  valid
    contributions

However, we all agree it was tainted and soiled by all the wacko
contributions as well.

But, right or wrong, he did DO SOMETHING! Now  we can all send
each other email until the ISPs fold, yet its still just email.

I dont see CNN covering this list, but they did cover ole Steve

So, one must ask, at least I must.

How did he do it and can it be repeated?

Just think of it, if the good things that were accomplished were
done by a credible group with only credible people, would that
not make for a more credible press conference and debate?

So then, what did Greer do right and how can it be re-done
again, with only the credible?

Right or wrong, Greer got off his a.. and did something. Maybe
we should see that facet of this as well?

Criticism & complaints accepted

Dan    ;o)

--
FREE Music Win PRIZES
Art Gomperz Bluegrass & Rockabilly
http://www.artGomperz.com/

UFO Folklore !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

Dan's Flatpicking in Michigan
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/flatpicking.htm


Dan's Magic in Michigan !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/magician

Dantronix !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/testwave.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 14

             Cydonian Imperative: o5-15-01 - More on the 'Fort'

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:27:23 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: o5-15-01 - More on the 'Fort'

The Cydonian Imperatve
5-15-01

The Fort: More Evidence of Structure
by Mac Tonnies

For photos, please see:

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html

("What's New?")


Along the remarkably straight eastern "wall" of the Fort is an
isolated teardrop-shaped formation. Contextual and morphological
clues suggest that the Fort, though badly eroded, is consistent
with archaeological interpretations. If this is the case, then
the "teardrop" may have once played a significant structural
role.

[image]

This teardrop-shaped feature runs parallel with the
Fort's eastern "wall" and shows intriguing internal
shape.

The "teardrop" is a symmetrical feature similar to others found
in Cydonia, although not necessarily of the same scale. It
appears to have a central spine or wall that is unusual for a
small geological formation in a region as weathered as Cydonia
(see photo above).


[image]

This rectilinear "tear" on the Face's cheek appears unsually
structural, as opposed to the featureless chunks attributed to
erosion.

Most small "mounds" in Cydonia, except for the ones suspected of
artificiality, are amorphic and random, fully consistent with
natural erosion. The "teardrop" has a level of detail that is
both rare and puzzling, very much like the rectinear "teardrop"
feature on the "Face."

[image]

The second (elevated) "teardrop" feature.

Most interestingly, the "teardrop" next to the Fort is
overlooked by a very similar bisymmetric teardrop-shaped feature
on top of the eastern "platform". This second feature is "aimed"
at the exact center of the ground-level "teardrop" and is
positioned precisely ninety degrees from its somewhat larger
counterpart. And like its counterpart, it exhibits a curious
central "spine." The "platform teardrop" was one of the
formations on the Fort's eastern "wall" that suggested "notches"
in the relatively low-resolution Viking images, other candidates
being natural-looking craters (which may themselves be direct
evidence of why the Fort collapsed in the first place).

If both of these streamlined features are the product of wind
erosion, then this perpendicular placement is most unusual;
similar "alignment" would be expected from features exposed to
millennia of wind or water erosion, such as small, water-rounded
outcroppings in a delta or river.

Right angles are rare in nature. I feel the odds of two
essentially identical formations occuring in virtually the same
place as part of the same anomolous landform (at right angles to
one another) provide a high degree of anomaly that may help us
determine if conscious intervention once played a role in
shaping the Cydonia landscape. Additional high-resolution
photographs of the Fort are recommended.

-end-








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                     Re: OK How About This...? - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:22:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 07:33:51 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Felder


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:03 EDT
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: OK How About This....?

<snip>

 >And why should I hang myself out to dry when the majority of
 >the UFO community is not going to believe what I say because
 >they don't like the message.

Kevin, List:

If you don't want to hang yourself out to dry in the process of
doing your level best to give we the people nobodies out here
the truth behind the UFO question, then that's your choice. But
I don't understand why anyone is getting so upset and pissed off
because Greer did _not_ mind hanging himself out to dry and
doing what he wanted to do.

I agree that people don't want to hear it. They like the stories
about military subterfuge and covert government operations and
cute little aliens trying to save the planet and reptilitan stud
muffins making nightly visits to some singing bimbo. I think
you're right about that. But the fact remains that a man of
Greer's highly questionable credibility _did_ hang himself out
to dry, and he's not drying out. And bitching about him and what
he did on a bunch of E-mail Lists isn't going to change that.

<snip>

 >I could go on, but we refuse to police ourselves, so what would
 >be the point. We have the evidence about these people and if we
 >mention it, then suddenly we become the bad guys out to destroy
 >ufology just because we have told the truth. We are called
 >jealous because we didn't get invited to participate in Greer's
 >circus and when we do post information suggesting problems, we
 >are attacked as "big name" ufologists who are jealous.

Again, you are correct. There is no policing of the UFO field,
no unity among the name researchers and noted ufologists. And
that is exactly why a man like Greer has captured the attention
of we the people. Whether he is actually accomplishing anything
or not, he at least is giving the _appearance_ that he is. And
since we the people aren't interested in fact and data and
truth, according to this post of yours, we the people are
gravitating toward Greer and losing faith in the ufologists and
researchers we've looked up to all these years.

But we the people aren't quite as dumb as we seem. Left alone,
this whole Greer thing would have died a natural death in time.
We the people would have figured out he ain't delivering on all
the hype. We the people would have remembered that this is the
same man who thinks he can whistle and a UFO will plop down in
his back yard. Left alone, this would have been another
lame-brain headline grabbing sensationalist that we the people
eventually lose interest in. But all the whining and bitching
and flaming that is taking place all over the internet is
_exactly_ what is adding fuel to Greer's fire!

I just think that there can be support for the push for open,
Congressional hearings without all the flaming and attacking and
posturing. From the non-ufologist side of things, which is where
I'm sitting, this looks like it has turned into a glorified
pissing contest. It goes back to the old addage: if you want
respect, act respectable. If you want credibility, act credible.

<snip>

 >So, once again, would be the whole point? You have the data, but
 >you would rather accuse of us something evil rather than believe
 >that Greer's press conference is doomed and we'll get splashed
 >with the debris. The question that should be asked is if Greer
 >can call down flying saucers, why not show the press one of
 >those rather than several people whose military credentials are
 >less than perfect.

I'm not accusing you of anything, Kevin. I'm just trying to get
you... meaning ufologists and researchers... to understand that
you are basically shooting yourselves in the foot with all this
negative discussion regarding Greer. The only complaints I'm
seeing regarding Greer and Co. are on Lists where ufologists and
known researchers are subscribed. I'm just trying to get you to
understand that people are looking at the UFO community as a
whole right now, and it is coming up looking like a bunch of
whiney cry-babies because of all of this sort of negative stuff!
Duh!

The point is that Greer and Co. need to be countered. But this
Greer-bashing isn't doing it... it is having the opposite effect
around the internet. And it isn't touching anyone _beyond_ the
internet that I can see.

I don't have the answers, dude. But I would hope that those who
are serious about the respect and credibility of the UFO field
would put their heads together and come up with something better
in the way of a rebuttal to Greer and Co. than to flame him and
his witnesses on email Lists.

BTW... one question... when you say this:

 >You have the data, but you would rather accuse of us something
 >evil rather than believe that Greer's press conference is doomed
 >and we'll get splashed with the debris.

You're not insinuating guilt by association would come into play
here, are you? :)


Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                      Re: OK How About This...? - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:33:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 07:38:36 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Hall


 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:01:13 GMT

 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:13:44 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This...?

 >>>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:49:28 -0400
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?

 >>>That is precisely what we've been doing here! I have also
 >>>discussed it with Errol on SDI (large UFO savvy audience) and I
 >>>continue to use the reach of this List to get the word out on
 >>>Greer and CSETI. We've been doing what you suggest all along
 >>>Bobbie.

 >>You hit the nail on the head here, dude..the crux of the problem.
 >>You are preaching to the choir...."large UFO savvy audience".
 >>_That_ is the problem! Greer's little press conference _did not_
 >>preach to the choir. He got the attention of people who don't
 >>even have internet access!

 >>Example: my mother heard about Greer's press conference on the
 >>radio here. She hasn't heard a single _word_ that anyone else
 >>has said on the subject of Greer or disclosure or UFOs or
 >>anything because she _does not have internet access_!!

 >>Greer reached her, though. You and EBK and all those who have
 >>the most sincere motives and intentions at heart have _not_
 >>reached her, nor have you reached any of the others that have
 >>heard about Greer's press conference on the tv or radio, or read
 >>about it in the newspaper.

 >>_That_ is the point I'm trying to make!

 >>Greer hit an audience that the internet UFO community doesn't
 >>touch. And you aren't going to counter his influence on that
 >>enormously large group of people on a world-wide basis by
 >>writing emails on an E-Mail List.

 >Boy Bob, you did hit it on the head!

 >This is a great List, but still a List with limited audience.

 >Greer has gotten his message out beyond the email communities
 >and beyond the websites. I have noticed with dismay, that for
 >all those that criticize Greer (as should be) I have never seen
 >anyone try to do it better.

 >How come?

 >Why is it that Greer gets this far and no one else does?

 >There certainly seems to be plenty of noble ideas floating
 >around this List, but not much action.


Dan,

Once again I see "any action is better than no action." With all
due respect, I strongly disagree with that. Where (and what) did
Greer get? A lot of publicity for himself, a probable influx of
donations from the gullible and uncritical, but no hearings
(don't hold your breath) nor nothing constructive and positive
for Ufology. It caused a splash in the news that, even by
Bobbie's example, was not understood by people who know very
little about the subject.

Many of us have tried to do it better for many years, but since
we are not sensationalists and don't have the money to pay the
obvious big bills here, we can't attract the media. Then what
are we worried about? The foolishness and pseudoscience spouted
by Greer will be remembered both by Capitol Hill staff members
and the news media. The latter, being blind and deaf to the
serious side of the subject, will equate Greer with Ufology. The
notion of Congressional hearings on such a "tabloid" subject
will be unthinkable. And there goes the ball game.

Those of you who "want to do it better" need to channel some $$$
to those who damn well could do it better, more honestly, and in
principled fashion.


Dick Hall









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:01:03 +1200
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:33:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers

 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:15:35 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200

Hi Robert, List

 ><snip>

 >William wrote:

 >>Corso was a patriot and couldn't stand by and let the US be made
 >>a fool of so he contacted Paul Scott a political columnist of
 >>some note and divulged "all" to him. This too me was a very
 >>crafty way of forcing the Presidents hand by making the info
 >>public whilst still remaining in the background as an
 >>unknown...where all good intelligence ppl should be.

 >>Scott, or others he told released the story to the public
 >>forcing the President to confront the Russians. The rest is
 >>history.

 >What most people are "ignorant" of is that their was storys and
 >tales being told about so called missiles and other in cuba for
 >at least a year previous to the crisis. Folks coming out of the
 >country to the US were telling storys about missiles and such.
 >This was leaking out to the media in August of '62. I also
 >recall seeing a CIA estimate dated in August of 62 which spoke
 >of the anti aircraft type missiles being put in Cuba, or Cuber
 >as JFK referred to the country.

 >JFK's own CIA director warned about the Soviets introducing
 >military equipment including missiles into Cuba in the many
 >months preceeding the crisis.

 >The point being that tales and storys about Russian military
 >equipment including missiles being introduced into Cuba were
 >either being discussed by administration officials and or
 >leaking into the media long before Corso ever showed up. Also
 >keep in mind that nobody cared as long as the weapons were not
 >considered "offensive" in nature.

We don't know that this was long before Corso showed up. This
happened in October '62.  You'd have to pretty short sighted to
think Corso hadn't been following these August '62  media leaks
and discussions. He even says ..."as the summer of '62 came to
an end, ominous reports were circulating all through Washington
concerning  Soviet freighters making their way into Cuban
waters. The traffic was intense, but there was no response from
our intelligence people on what was happening" Noone has said
that it wasn't known, just that it had a "lid clamped down on
it"

In fact if these leaks and discussions were taking place, _all_
the more reason for Corso to act. It seemed to him everyone was
ignoring it

Whether there were stories being circulated or not regarding
anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba doesn't really make much
difference. The point being that it seemed to Corso the same lid
was clamped down on the nukes when the cannisters were
discovered, in essence forcing his hand.


 >It wasn't until a U-2 photo recce plane brought back photo
 >evidence (actual proof if you will) of cannisters on the ground
 >in cuba, and the photo interpretation team identified them as
 >missile containers and informed JFK. The photos are what
 >"forced" JFK to deal with Cuba.

Isn't this what Corso said tipped the balance for him?
He was seeing the the US (on the basis of the cannisters)
at the very least being embarrassed and the most, in absolute
danger of having missile attacks only 15 mins away from
Washington. A very precarious situation indeed in his mind

 >As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
 >did not identify Corso by name. Unless someone can find Paul
 >Scotts papers where he claims to have gotten all the details
 >from Corso, all we would find out is that Corso was one of many
 >100s of people telling stories about missiles in Cuba. The bottom
 >line is JFK did nothing until the photographic proof was in
 >hand.

Yes I agree Robert....it wasn't 'til the "nuke cannister"
photographs turned up that JFK did something Where Corso comes
in up is when he tried to find out if anything was being done
about the "nukes". The CIA was being "mum" and was going to
downplay like they were doing with the anti-aircraft missiles
because the Kennedy admin didn't want a Soviet
confrontation.(???) Whether this was right or not we don't know.
The point being, in _his_  (Corso),  and his friends minds
no-one was doing anything .

I also agree the news articles re Scott would be
helpful


Cheers

William (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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:14:30 +1200
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:35:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:43:45 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Never mind that fact that
 >Birnes claims that the book is Corso. Then you had Corso's son
 >who was going to release the "actual" Corso story that was
 >written with his own hand as opposed to being Birnesized.

Robert,

Do you have any other information re Corso's sons story...
release, title, publisher etc?

Thanks

William










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                 Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:05:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:37:41 -0400
Subject: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'


There are a number of underlying issues concerning the recent
'Disclosure Project'.

The point which shouldn't be overlooked and the most significant
one, is that Dr Steven Greer _does_ represent mainstream
ufology. On behalf of it, he presented a substantial amount of
data and testimony which was claimed to justify the 'disclosure'
initiative.

As we know from discussions on 'UFO Skeptics' and 'UFO UpDates',
there are critical problems with some of that evidence and
perhaps more to be revealed. However, unless all of Greer's
collated evidence is equally nonsense, then his achievement is
notable. More so, the media were essentially unaware of the
evidential concerns we recognise.

As some others seem to realise, 'ufology' did actually,
_formally_ present its 'alien visitation and cover up of same'
case to the media.

And the major impact was... a few objective reports?

Presumably that's it then?

The outcome seems to be a confirmation that ufology's case is
not convincing... compelling... credible... probable... I'm not
sure how to best characterise the result.

However, isn't this _the_ fundamental landmark and watershed for
ufology?


Supposing all of Greer's compiled, 'disclosure' evidence was
factually true and the attendant media accepted that, would the
conclusion have been any different?

What if those who have been challenged to at least provide some
competition were to agree on an alternative selection of 'best
evidence'. Would the outcome still have been any different?

If not, then what does ufology _ever_ hope to accomplish that
Greer hasn't already?

How does it intend to do so and on what basis is there any
optimism of being more successful?

Unless there's some covert, cunning plan, Greer's detractors
apparently have no cohesive strategy at all.


Outwith Greer's initiative, a quick look around the main
ufological organisations and representative's web sites
confirms:

MUFON - the world's largest 'UFO' organisation - promote Greer's
'Campaign for Disclosure'.

Their forthcoming symposium has also invited:

- Dr Roger Leir on 'alien implants'
- Mack and Hopkins on 'alien abductions'
- Friedman, Robert and Ryan Wood on the reality of 'MJ-12'

and...

Dr Steven Greer.

UFO Magazine' [US] currently report on 'Alien DNA', 'Alien
Surgery On Australian Aborigines' and 'DNA Investigation Of
Abduction Evidence'.

Also a central promotion is the video, 'UFO Abductions: A Global
Phenomenon', alleging that, "Over 4 million Americans believe
they were victims of the most frightening aspect of the UFO
phenomenon".

If we click on, 'The Secret NASA Transmissions', it generates a
pop-up window which is a link to Greer's 'disclosure broadcast'.


'UFO Magazine' [UK] feature their new video range, including:

- Robert and Ryan Wood on the reality of 'MJ-12' - James 'Bond'
Johnson on the true 'Roswell' story - Dr Roger Leir, once more
revealing that 'alien implant' evidence.

It's highlighted that Leir, "presented a mind blowing lecture at
our 18th Leeds International UFO Conference. This brave
individual 'who relies on the medical practice for his living'
is on the record showing that there are indeed some unusual
features that science can't explain attributed to foreign
objects that have been surgically removed from individuals
bodies who claim alien abduction".

One other notable video on offer is the evidence accumulated
by... Dr Steven Greer.

He's described as, "'a medical doctor' who is not afraid of
telling the world and some of the worlds leading politicians,
military and security personal of the overwhelming evidence that
has built up over the years pointing to the reality of an
Alien/UFO presence here on earth. Dr Greer speaks openly of his
plans for 'Disclosure'".

'UFO Magazine' [UK] are unbelievably still touting the utterly
discredited - an embarrassment to common sense never mind
ufology - 'NASA Faked the Moon Landings' video, with the claim,
"This has to be one of the most controversial, most damming and
most believable portions of egg ever delivered to the face of
NASA".


We can therefore see that Greer's programme is, as I initially
suggested and before even browsing these web sites,
comprehensively proven as inherently representative of 'ufology'
per se and the claims advertised.

Indeed, it is endorsed.

Period.


The Greer naysayers, skeptics and debunkers are confronted by
this plain reality.

Whatever 'ufology' these debunkers believe they symbolise is
clearly a faction.

That's also a _proven fact_.

Period.


Where now bravehearts... you've made your ultimate stance and
the ineffectual, indifferent, apathetic retort from those you
implore to take ufology 'seriously', is a crushing defeat.

Kudos to Greer for at least having the courage to lead the vast
majority of ufologists in their final battle.


Best wishes,

James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

              Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:22:48 +1200
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:39:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Sawers


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:08:35 -0000

G'day Richard

<snip>

 >Start using a search engine or two to obtain information about
 >Greer, Alfred Webre (who has emerged as a primary information
 >contact point), and Daniel Sheehan (who is also emerging as one
 >of the intellectual "leaders"). Sheehan is a well-known
 >idealist, leftist public interest lawyer and strong
 >conspiratorialist (as is Webre, who has stated that the late
 >election was rigged by covert forces as a "destabilization"
 >operation by installing Bush in power).

 >Sheehan, so far as I know right now, has a more respectable
 >record though his career has been rather strange, and I flat out
 >don't believe his story in the 1970s about going to "a new wing
 >of the National Archives which had armed guards stationed at the
 >entrance" (there ain't no such animal") and being shown secret
 >photos of crashed saucers, a secret report on visiting aliens,
 >etc.

 >The first two have web sites. I found information and even audio
 >recordings of Sheehan's UFO-related talks, track records, and
 >publications, including books. Check your library and
 >interlibrary loan if necessary.

Took up your challenge and checked out the page, of Alfred and
Geri Webre. The engine intitially took me to a document that was
most intriguing regarding a CIA/Kennedy/Marylyn Monroe
connection. If you havent seen this site, please check out

http://home.fuse.com/ufo/MARILYN.htm

So far I haven't been able to find much on Daniel Sheehan. But
will try another search engine. "Dogpile" is erratic to say the
least :-)

William (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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                     Re: OK How About This....? - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 00:38:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:42:04 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - Gates


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:29:32 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?

 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:38:36 -0700

 >>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: OK How About This....?

 ><snip>

 >>What earthly
 >>good would it be to do a press conference after the 15 minute
 >>attention spans have been broken up and herded in to a new,
 >>greener, pasture.

 >If this Greer and Co. Show isn't going to hold the attention of
 >the "average Joe" for more than 15 minutes, then why all the
 >hoopla about the damage that this is doing to ufology in
 >general, how poor an example of a ufologist Greer is, etc? Why
 >not just let the whole thing die a natural death from lack of
 >interest?

 >Why not just ignore the man, let him fade away after his 15
 >minutes of fame, and allow things to resume the usual status quo
 >of the ufo community/industry/whatever you want to call it?

Hi Bobbie,

The press conference will be pronounced a total sucess, even if
nothing actually comes from it.

Greer will fade out this year (as he has in years previous)
after his disclosure press conference in DC. We will probably
get a couple of updates or status reports posted on this list.
We will likely hear fund raisers from Greer about buying the
witness video tapes (the complete tales and storys of course)
not to mention edited transcripts of the witness tales and
storys for $$.

The folks who didn't or don't now agree with Greer and or cast
doubt on witnesses will be pronounced as being part of the evil
conspiracy by Greer lap dogs and supporters.

Things will die off again... in preparation for the next
disclosure event or press conference say in a year or two.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Cammack

From: Diana Cammack <cammack@eomw.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:05:54 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:49:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Cammack


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 22:33:34 -0400

 >Dennis,

 >Let's try to put the subject on the right track.
 >You obviously have a problem with the bullshiters of ufology.
 >I do also.

 >But are you also sensitive only to the anti-UFO con-artists?
 >Please put on the latter this list the vast majority of the
 >dudes and dudesses who justify their spurious skepticism
 >towards the subject of UFOs as non-conventional structured
 >mechanisms by simply ignoring the facts.

List: T

here have been two topics discussesd in the last week that I
feel I can add to:

First, the disclosure effort is one that should be
supported - Congressional hearings (or better said, some sort of
UN hearings if we really want the issues internationally
recognised & debated) are worth while and should be promoted by
the whole UFO community.

Greer should be praised for organising the movement this far...
no one else had! Whether there is room for some others in the
UFO community to help him, to join into the process even at this
late date, will depend on his and their egos, I'm sure, as well
as the 'gaps' that need to be filled within his movement. That
_he_ did it, should not detract from the idea itself, or other's
involvement... Get involved somehow!

This leads to the second issue: if there are witnesses within
his movement who claim evidence that is not sound, or make
statements that cannot be proven, then these should be ferreted
out and exposed, preferably from within his movement (by anyone
who wants to get involved) but certainly outside it, if need be.

It would _not_ lend credibility to any hearings or to the subject
of UFOs generally, or to the disclosure movement, for senior UFO
researchers or others to 'self-censor' in the interest of
'unity' within UFO circles. In fact, if senior UFO researchers
can show that some stories (or witnesses) are 'untrue', but at
the same time say that 'this other one is true', it would only
lend credibility to the issue, the remaining witnesses and to
the hearings if/when they happen.

I would imagine the media et al would think better of the UFO
movement if it could differentiate between truth and lies, good
witnesses and bad, and say so. But the criticisms must be based
on hard evidence, not feelings about someone's personality, or
because the story seems unlikely.

Bringing hard scientific criteria to judge the stories emerging
from the disclosure movement, like all other aspects of the UFO
subject, is needed.


Diana Cammack, PhD.

New to the list though not the field. Now in Central
Africa...where Greer's webcast was (amazingly!) available...









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                       Porto Symposium - October 2001

From: Joaquim Fernandes <jfernan@clix.pt>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:34:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:22:33 -0400
Subject: Porto Symposium - October 2001


To the List members,

In the information below you can learn the speakers and topics
of the 2th International Symposium 'Frontiers of Science' to be
held in 26 to 28 October in Porto, Portugal, at the University
Fernando Pessoa. The event is organized by the CTEC - Center fro
Transdisciplinary Studies on Consciousness.

Greetings,

Joaquim Fernandes
CTEC
UFP
Porto- Portugal

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

UNIVERSIDADE FERNANDO PESSOA
UNIVERSITY FERNANDO PESSOA
Praca 9 de Abril, 349
4249-004 Porto
Portugal
www.ufp.pt

Center for Transdisciplinary Studies on Consciousness
(CTEC)

Announces the
Scientific Program of the

2th International Symposium 'Frontiers of Science'

to be held at the University Fernando Pessoa
the 26 - 28 October 2001

Friday, 26/10

9:30 - Open cerimony

10:00 - Joaquin Perez Pariente (National Board of Scientific
         Research, Madrid, Spain): "A new vision of Alchemy: the
         alchemic transmutations and the structure of matter".

10:40 - Sergio Razente (Bial Fondation/Univ. do Minho,
         Portugal): "The PSI phenomena as a random
         fluctuation"

11:10 - Coffee break

11:30 - Carlos Fernandes (Education and Psychology Institute,
         Univ. do Minho, Portugal): "Notion of time and
         biological rhythms: implications for the human
         resources"

12:10 - Antonio Marcos (CTEC, Univ. Fernando Pesssoa, porto):
         "Ortomolecular feeding"

12:50 - Debate (Moderator: Antonio Fernandes da Fonseca, Univ.
         Fernando Pessoa, Porto)

13:30 - Lunch

15:00 - Beverly Rubik (Institute for Frontier Science, USA):
         "Subtle energies and energy medicines"

15:40 - Gilda Moura (Center for Altered States of Consciousness
         Studies, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil): "Opening consciousness
         and high brain frequencies - a study of ecstasy states"

16:10 - Coffee break

16:30 - Vitor Rodrigues (Faculty of Psychology, Univ. of Lisbon,
         Portugal): "The core of the human existence"

17:10 - Chandra Wickramasinghe (Cardiff Univ. United Kingdom):
           "Panspermia: a new world vision"

17:30 - Debate (Moderator: Franscisco Carrapio, Vegetal Biology
         Lab, Faculty of Sciences, Univ. of  Lisbon)


Saturday, 27/10

10,00 - Dick Bierman (Utrecht Univ. Holland):
           "Consciousness and  Physics: some experimental approaches"

10,40 - Mario de Sousa (Biomedical Sciences Institute, Univ. of
         Porto): "The future for human reproduction"
         (tentative title)

11:10 - Coffee break

11:30 - Manuel Domingos (S. Jose Hospital/Univ. Lusiada,
         Lisbon): "Transition Experiences (VT) or Near Death
         Experiences (EPM) - its phenomenology and epistemology"

12:10 - Joaquim Fernandes (CTEC, Univ. Fernando Pessoa, Porto);
         Raul Berenguel (CTEC Associate Investigator); Bento
         Correia (INETI, Lisbon); Mario Simes (Faculty of
         Medicine, Univ. Lisbon): ""Solar" events and ecstasy
         states in the "Marian Apparitions" experiences -
         preliminary and experimental approaches to the physical
         and physiological phenomena"

12:50 - Debate (Moderator: Agostinho de Almeida, Univ.
         Portucalense, Porto)

13:30 - Lunch

15:00 - Jean-Pierre Petit (CNRS, Marseille Astrophysics
         Observatory, Frabce): "Twins universes: matter and
         anti-matter"

15:40 - Pedro Barbosa (CTEC, Univ. Fernando Pessoa, Porto):
         "Artificial Intelligence, Automatic Tex and Meaning
         Creation"

16:10 - Coffee break

16:30 - Nelson Lima Santos (CTEC, Univ. Fernando Pessoa, Porto):
         "The contemporary experience of the magic thought"

17:10 - Brian O'Leary (former NASA Apollo Program Astronaut,
         USA): "Re-Inheriting the Earth: Sustainability and
         Consciousness as Solutions"

17:50 - Debate (Moderator. Jose Ferreira da Silva, Faculty of
         Sciences, Univ. of Porto)

18:30 - Closing cerimony


Sunday, 28/10

Day devoted to social events

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

Information: Joaquim Fernandes (CTEC, Univ. Fernando Pessoa) by
e-mail jfernan@clix.pt or Antonio Marcos (CTEC, Univ. Fernando
Pessoa) by e-mail amarcos@ufp.pt










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                      Re: OK How About This...? - Geib

From: Dan Geib geibdan@qtm.net
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:40:22 GMT
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:27:01 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Geib


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:33:05 -0000

 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:01:13 GMT


 >>Boy Bob, you did hit it on the head!

 >>This is a great List, but still a List with limited audience.

 >>Greer has gotten his message out beyond the email communities
 >>and beyond the websites. I have noticed with dismay, that for
 >>all those that criticize Greer (as should be) I have never seen
 >>anyone try to do it better.

 >>How come?

 >>Why is it that Greer gets this far and no one else does?

 >>There certainly seems to be plenty of noble ideas floating
 >>around this List, but not much action.

 >Dan,

 >Once again I see "any action is better than no action." With all
 >due respect, I strongly disagree with that. Where (and what) did
 >Greer get? A lot of publicity for himself, a probable influx of
 >donations from the gullible and uncritical, but no hearings
 >(don't hold your breath) nor nothing constructive and positive
 >for Ufology. It caused a splash in the news that, even by
 >Bobbie's example, was not understood by people who know very
 >little about the subject.

 >Many of us have tried to do it better for many years, but since
 >we are not sensationalists and don't have the money to pay the
 >obvious big bills here, we can't attract the media. Then what
 >are we worried about? The foolishness and pseudoscience spouted
 >by Greer will be remembered both by Capitol Hill staff members
 >and the news media. The latter, being blind and deaf to the
 >serious side of the subject, will equate Greer with Ufology. The
 >notion of Congressional hearings on such a "tabloid" subject
 >will be unthinkable. And there goes the ball game.

 >Those of you who "want to do it better" need to channel some $$$
 >to those who damn well could do it better, more honestly, and in
 >principled fashion.


Richard,

Thanks for your reply.

Based on your reply I look forward to you or others doing better
than Greer. I can volunteer a couple of hundred dollars if it
will help. How does the song go?

Too much talk and not enough action?

Dan









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                     Re: OK How About This...? - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 08:09:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:29:43 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Felder


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:33:05 -0000


 >Once again I see "any action is better than no action." With
 >all due respect, I strongly disagree with that. Where (and what)
 >did Greer get? A lot of publicity for himself, a probable influx
 >of donations from the gullible and uncritical, but no hearings
 >(don't hold your breath) nor nothing constructive and positive
 >for Ufology. It caused a splash in the news that, even by
 >Bobbie's example, was not understood by people who know very
 >little about the subject.

Hi Richard.

You are right when you say that "the ends do not justify the
means", as you stated in a previous post. I also agree with you
when you say that "any action is better than no action".
However, both points are irrelevant right now. The deed is done.
Greer did his thing, he did it before anyone else did. Of course
there are others who could have done it better, who could have
done it with more credibility, who could have done it far more
responsibly, and who most of us who follow UFO stuff and aren't
out spending our time flashing strobe lights at airplanes or
whistling Dixie and hoping some little grey bugger will join our
backyard bar-b-que would have much preferred to see someone
besides Greer on that podium.

But it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

It angers me and saddens me that the response from noted
ufologists that I've seen on these email lists has been so
inflammatory and negative and flat out bitchy. On the one hand,
we see complaining about the poor quality of witnesses and such,
then on the other hand, we see things that basically amount to a
lovely whine about "he got the money to do a press conference
like that and we didn't". It just all looks really
unprofessional and demonstrates no grace under pressure
whatsoever.

Everyone seems to agree that nothing much will come from all of
this. So what would it have hurt to take the high road here, and
post something to the effect:

"Congrats, Dr. Greer. I wish you well in your endeavors. As much
as I would like to get on board and support this effort, I
cannot, in good faith, back these witnesses for the following
reasons:"

Something along that line, we the people could live with. And
those who read the public archives of these email lists wouldn't
be thinking that the ufo field is just a bunch of jealous
egotistical maniacs.

I happen to take this stuff very seriously. And, whether we
agree with Greer or not, there is a momentary light on ufology
at the moment. I just hate that ufology didn't put its best foot
forward.

But I'm sure by this time next week, this will all be a moot
point. Greer will have faded away, and things will be back to
the status quo. It is just a shame that good, honest, reputable,
credible ufologists and researchers couldn't take advantage of
this momentary break in the wall of "lunatic fringe" that
surrounds the field.

My grandmother once told me that the only thing in life we have
to regret is missed opportunity. I think this is one of them.

Oh, well... such is life...


Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                     Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 06:41:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:37:15 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This....? - McCoy


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:29:32 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This....?

 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:38:36 -0700

 >>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: OK How About This....?

 ><snip>

 >>What earthly
 >>good would it be to do a press conference after the 15 minute
 >>attention spans have been broken up and herded in to a new,
 >>greener, pasture.

 >If this Greer and Co. Show isn't going to hold the attention of
 >the "average Joe" for more than 15 minutes, then why all the
 >hoopla about the damage that this is doing to ufology in
 >general, how poor an example of a ufologist Greer is, etc? Why
 >not just let the whole thing die a natural death from lack of
 >interest?

 >Why not just ignore the man, let him fade away after his 15
 >minutes of fame, and allow things to resume the usual status quo
 >of the ufo community/industry/whatever you want to call it?

 >Just trying to figure it all out....

So am I, but there is no industry, like Richard Hall said, (to
paraphrase) "We have day jobs." A industry is any major lobby
group, whether widgets or widgeons, it's there in the halls of
congress. The question was asked in the movie 'The Right Stuff',
"What makes the rocket go up? - bucks, no bucks no Buck
Rodgers." This lies at the heart of the problem. Who has the
bucks. I for one don't, neither does anyone else who is serious
about the question.

But, there are people who , willing to spend big, big, bucks to
find out that we're not alone. and are willing to fund anyone
who says "We are not alone!!" Then, there are the folks who say
"We are not alone", however. Then there are the folks that say:
"We may not be alone", but then there are the folks who say we
are alone. Maybe. those who say those kind of things, do not
have the answer, so they are irrelevant.

The nature of the human (and I am convinced a fallen, nature to
basic human thought,) heart is to search, and Mr. Greer may
think there is a benign force behind his calling to the Aliens
in his collective "Snipe Hunts".

However, he uses people. Edgar Mitchell for one. His 'Military'
(not all) people are more than questionable, as they are not
able to stand and deliver, as illustrated by by the Vietnam vets
- and others - on this List who were there. In other words,
putting their butt on the line and getting shot at. Nearly dying
changes your outlook on things. As far as I see them none of the
more outrageous witnesses have ever, despite claims to the
contrary, "been there done that". This is why Greer's people
outrage the folks who were there. Even if all but one witness is
credible, it's the one with the rubber nose and baggy-pants that
is going to be noticed by the media and congress and the others
are painted with the same Greasepaint.

It is because we as a people in our country like to have the
answer neat, pat and simple. Little thinking would be nice,
because there would be the answer to "Life the Universe and
everything." Guys like Greer and Co. say they have the answer.
No different (and some of the same techniques involved) with
Greer and the late (unlamented on my part) Team of Jim and Tammy
Bakker or some of the New Age Gurus such as Oregon's own Bagwan
Rashneesh. All it takes is a message.

Eventually they were brought down under the weight of their own
deceit, but not without inflicting grevious damage to souls and
psyches. The efforts to say;" Wait a minute! what is this?" and
the given track record of the person(s) questioned
is_necessary_. In the Scientific "industry" it's called "peer
review" .The work must withstand scrutiny.

This is called constructive criticism. Greer isn't going to go
away, but the damage has been done (although it could have been
worse) and the folks who point out the flaws should be
commended, not condemned.

Finally, I am no researcher, or consumer, or dilettante, I am on
this list because I want to find what's real, and I contribute
in my own limited way. Sometimes I stick my neck out (usually
with attempt at humor) or call it as I see it from my own
aviation background and as a student of history and of things in
the sky. I am always prepared to get whacked if I'm wrong, or
merely misunderstood, but as my Late Buckaroo (the real thing)
Father said:"It's better to be a lighting rod than a cowpie, as
the difference is what they attract."


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                        Re: K How About This - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 08:59:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 20:39:21 -0400
Subject: Re: K How About This - Felder


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:33:05 -0000

<snip>

 >Many of us have tried to do it better for many years, but
 >since we are not sensationalists and don't have the money to
 >pay the obvious big bills here, we can't attract the media.

I apologize for taking a second post to respond to the same
message, but something struck me after I had sent the other post
in already... must remember to have coffee _before_ doing the
email thing.....

Question on the above, Richard. You say "..don't have the money
to pay the obvious big bills here". How much does it cost to
host a press conference like the one Greer did? I assume, since
you've mentioned the prohibitive cost of such an event more than
once, that you have done some research into that? Can you tell
us, please, about how much such an event costs? I would be
interested to know how much Greer spent on his little show.

 >Those of you who "want to do it better" need to channel some
 >$$$ to those who damn well could do it better, more honestly,
 >and in principled fashion.

How much money are we talking here, Richard? What figure did
your research into the matter come up with? Or are you just
assuming that such a thing costs an amount of money that is
prohibitive to the average researcher? I don't know anything
about the cost of these press events, so I'm putting my trust in
you, who have done the research and have the experience, as you
suggested we do in an earlier post, as well.


Thanks :)

Bobbie



==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                               Talk And Action

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:16:11 -0400
Subject: Talk And Action


I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
groups, or supported their publication programs.

If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
three groups it comprises:

The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
responsibly.

Now for my proposal. If everyone on this List who sincerely
wants to see Congressional hearings and other serious efforts to
bring out the truth were to do the following, it could have a
major impact. Purchase a copy of The UFO Evidence, Volume II if
you can afford it (via MUFON, Amazon.com, or the Scarecrow Press
web site) and send it to your Congressman or Senator with a
cover letter urging him or her to support UFO hearings.

Lest you think this is self-serving, three-fourths of the
royalties go to the member groups of the UFO Research Coalition,
so you would be doing two worthwhile things at once: getting the
report to those who should see it and supporting serious UFO
research. (And if you either appreciate my work or would like to
see me out of the picture, the remaining one-fourth goes to my
retirement fund.)

Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
and pseudoscience.

Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

And if you really can't even afford the most inexpensive of
these books, then send your Congressman or Senator a letter
citing these three books and urging them to read them and to
support Congressional hearings.

Might be interesting.


Dick Hall








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

               Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:20:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:18:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:08:35 -0000
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:52:49 -0400
 >Subject: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!

<snip>

 >Confusing is it? Then either learn to trust those of us who have
 >the knowledge and experience, or spend less time opinionizing on
 >this site and more time investigating for yourself. If you have
 >access to the internet, you have access to rich sources of
 >information.

<snip>

 >And for Bobbie, as G.T. said, you just don't get
 >counter-attention without having legitimate news, except by
 >sensationalism. It is much easier said than done to hold such a
 >conference, and somebody put up a lot of money (which we don't
 >have) to pay for this one. It also takes a lot of time and
 >energy, and almost all of us have to work for a living.

Dick, List:

Ever hear of the Fund For UFO Research?

Here is an excerpt about them:

"FUND FOR UFO RESEARCH
P.O. Box 277
Mt. Rainier, MD 20712
Tel: (703) 684-6032
http://www.fufor.com/

This non-profit corporation was established in 1979 to raise
money to support scientific and educational projects submitted
by qualified researchers. It is composed solely of a 15 member
Board, most of the members being Ph.D.'s in various scientific
fields. In its 16 years, it has raised more than $500,000, which
has been used to fund investigations in the physical and social
sciences, to support scientific conferences, and to encourage
the serious treatment of UFOs by the press."

Why don't you put in an application for a grant to publicize the
real stuff, and tell the truth about the Greer fiasco in order to
tnecourage the serious treatment of UFOs by the press?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                             IFO Database Online

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:29:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:21:50 -0400
Subject: IFO Database Online


I found this website interesting. I'd like to know what others
think of the data supplied there. Lots of pics and such.

http://ifo.s5.com

Thanks

Bobbie
==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                      Re: Gordon Or Not Gordon? - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 16:33:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:24:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Gordon Or Not Gordon? - Bruni


 >From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 22:17:37 +0100
 >Subject: Gordon Or Not Gordon?

Interesting post David

 >Base officials started by explaining that UFO reports were not
 >recorded because, "The Air Force does not admit the existence of
 >UFOs." The Department of Defence spokesman did not have a
 >statement to make and when asked why explained, "I can't answer
 >that question." Two other Pentagon officials joined in, a
 >Colonel Jack Powel and a Lieutenant-Colonel Williams.
 >Lieutenant-Colonel Williams spent his time rejecting requests
 >for his first name and Powell added a wealth of knowledge to the
 >UFO phenomenon by stating, "I don't know his first name myself."

<snip>

 >Now then, as everyone here knows, there was a Colonel Gordon E.
 >Williams at Bentwaters during the infamous Rendlesham CE1/2/3
 >(take your pick). His actual involvement in the incident, of
 >course, varies depends on whose books you read.

 >The question is, was the Lt.Col. Williams of the 1973 UFO "press
 >conference" the same guy? When was Gordon Williams promoted to
 >full Colonel? How many half Colonels were there in the Air force
 >in 1973 called Williams?

<snip>

 >Can anyone throw any more light on this possible connection? Am
 >I barking up the wrong pine tree?

Check out his biog, he was in Wasington D.C. at that time.

MAJOR GENERAL GORDON E. WILLIAMS BIOGRAPHY
Retired Aug. 1, 1988

Before retiring Major General Gordon E. Williams was director
for plans and policy, J-5, Headquarters U.S. European Command,
Stuttgart-Vaihingen, West Germany.

General Williams was born in 1935, in Nashua, N.H., and
graduated from Alvirne High School, Hudson, N.H., in 1953. He
earned a bachelor of science degree in general engineering from
the U.S. Military Academy in 1957 and a master of science degree
in systems management from the University of Southern California
in 1971. He completed Air Command and Staff College in 1969,
National War College in 1975 and Harvard University's executive
program on national and international security in 1983.

He entered pilot training in August 1957 and received his wings
at Laredo Air Force Base, Texas, in September 1958. After
gunnery training at Luke Air Force Base, Ariz., and Nellis Air
Force Base, Nev., he was assigned to the 510th Tactical Fighter
Squadron, Clark Air Base, Philippines, in September 1959, flying
F-100s. The general subsequently was assigned to the 612th
Tactical Fighter Squadron, 401st Tactical Fighter Wing, England
Air Force Base, La. He represented the wing at William Tell
1962, the worldwide tactical gunnery meet. During this
assignment, General Williams also attended the Air Force Fighter
Weapons School at Nellis Air Force Base and Airborne School at
Fort Benning, Ga.

Selected for exchange duty with the U.S. Navy in 1964, General
Williams flew an F-4 combat tour of duty in Southeast Asia from
the carrier USS Ranger. He then was assigned to the initial Air
Force contingent in combat evaluation of the A-7 with the Navy,
again from the USS Ranger. In May 1968 he transferred to Edwards
Air Force Base, Calif., as Tactical Air Command project officer
for A-7D testing.

In February 1971 he was assigned to the Tactical Fighter
Division, Directorate of Operational Requirements, Headquarters
U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. He culminated this tour of duty
as chief, Advanced Systems Branch, with requirements
responsibilities for a broad range of new tactical fighters,
including F-15s, F-16s and A-10s.

General Williams graduated from the National War College in 1975
and then was assigned as commander, The United States Logistics
Group, Detachment 118, Izmir, Turkey. He served as the deputy
commander for operations, 406th Tactical Fighter Training Wing,
Zaragoza Air Base, Spain, from July 1976 to September 1977. He
then transferred to the 81st Tactical Fighter Wing, Royal Air
Force Station Bentwaters, England, as vice commander. He became
commander of the wing in August 1979. In May 1981 he moved to
Ramstein Air Base, West Germany, as inspector general, U.S. Air
Forces in Europe.

Upon returning to the United States in September 1982, General
Williams was assigned as director of aerospace safety, Air Force
Inspection and Safety Center, Norton Air Force Base, Calif. In
July 1984 he became center commander. In June 1985 he became
commander of the 13th Air Force, Pacific Air Forces, Clark Air
Base. In March 1987 he was assigned as assistant deputy chief of
staff for programs and resources at Air Force headquarters. He
assumed his present position in May 1987.

The general has more than 4,000 flying hours and has flown
numerous aircraft, including F-100s, F-4s, A-7s, A-10s and
F-15s. His military decorations and awards include the
Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit with oak leaf
cluster, Distinguished Flying Cross, Meritorious Service Medal
with oak leaf cluster, Air Medal with 15 oak leaf clusters, and
Navy Commendation Medal with "V" device and three service stars.

He was promoted to major general Sept. 1, 1984, with date of
rank March 1, 1981.


Georgina Bruni

"You Can't Tell The People".The Definitive Account of the Rendlesham
Forest UFO Mystery by Georgina Bruni. Published by Sidgwick & Jackson
Available on-line at: www.amazon.co.uk
Countries outside UK: www.netstoreusa.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

             Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:33:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:26:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Cecchini



 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:07:07 -0300

<snip>

 >Depending on grandiose personal claims, when there is so much
 >solid data, is fighting the battle with both hands tied behind
 >one's back. I haven't even talked about nuclear fusion rockets,
 >abductions, the silly arguments of the SETI cultists, etc.

Define "cult"; explain how SETI qualifies as one; and prove your
assertion that not only is Frank Drake a "SETI cultist" but that
he essentially and intentionally and knowingly leads the other
"cultists" away from the truth. (You implied this in your bio
and talk decription for last year's Bay Area UFO Expo 2000.)











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                    Re: OK How About This...? - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:07:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:32:48 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Cecchini


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:22:55 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?

 >But I don't understand why anyone is getting so upset and
 >pissed off because Greer did _not_ mind hanging himself out
 >to dry and doing what he wanted to do.

I'm not a ufologist, but let me hazard a guess as to what the
feeling is amongst ufologists; at the least, it's my feeling:

Serious ufologists have been spending many years and man-hours
to gather enough evidence to prove ("show beyond a reasonable
doubt") that there is a phenomenon worthy of serious study.

The going has been slow and frustrating, but it's been going
nonetheless.

Then along comes Greer, a "well-oiled machine" himself, and
totally jumps the gun, telling the whole world he has the
"undeniable proof", so forth and so on. Being the slick orator
(read: "B.S. artist") that he is, he gets attention.

We all know what the outcome of those claims have been:

No proof.

If he ever did "produce the goods", I'm pretty sure that very
few, if any, ufologists here would be upset in the least; even
though some people here have spent the better part of their
lives trying to "figure out what's going on", to me that implies
a certain mind-set that would welcome "the truth" from wherever
it may come; i.e. I don't see any "old timers" really getting
upset that the "newcomer" Greer "scooped them". I'd be willing
to bet they'd be dancing in the streets alongside everyone else
that's been "trying to figure it out".

But that isn't happening, "the truth" (whatever it is) isn't
being revealed, and Greer is giving ufology a sort of "boy who
cried wolf" reputation - and this is just about the last thing
this particular field of study needs!

This really isn't all that difficult to understand.

 >I'm not accusing you of anything, Kevin. I'm just trying to
 >get you... meaning ufologists and researchers... to understand
 >that you are basically shooting yourselves in the foot with all
 >this negative discussion regarding Greer.

But is it better to actively hurt Ufology, or to leave it at
its slow (some might even say "stagnant") and methodical pace?

 >I don't have the answers, dude. But I would hope that those
 >who are serious about the respect and credibility of the UFO
 >field would put their heads together and come up with something
 >better in the way of a rebuttal to Greer and Co. than to flame
 >him and his witnesses on email Lists.

I agree, but what do you have in mind?

Some of Greer's "witnesses" are already known in the field to be
of questionable reputation; he has yet to produce the "free
energy" machines he has access to; he has yet to "vector in" a
UFO over the White House; he makes claims about knowing the
intentions of the aliens (no doubt from all that telepathic
communication); etc.

For what it's worth, I think his public conferences might be
more effective if he leaves the grandiose claims at home and
just acts like an emcee, introducing the various alleged
witnesses and letting them fall or stand on the strength of
their words. But when he starts off his speeches saying how he
and they are going to prove this, that and the other thing, and
that he has available to him all this wonderful and miraculous
technology... Well, it does Ufology no good when at the
end of the day he's left everyone again wondering, "Where's
the beef? Was that the beef? That looked like old beef!"











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                      Re: OK How About This...? - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:47:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:42:02 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Clark


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:22:55 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:03 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: OK How About This....?


Kevin and Bobbie.

 >>I could go on, but we refuse to police ourselves, so what would
 >>be the point. We have the evidence about these people and if we
 >>mention it, then suddenly we become the bad guys out to destroy
 >>ufology just because we have told the truth. We are called
 >>jealous because we didn't get invited to participate in Greer's
 >>circus and when we do post information suggesting problems, we
 >>are attacked as "big name" ufologists who are jealous.

 >Again, you are correct. There is no policing of the UFO field,

This simply is untrue. Of course there is policing, in the form
of internal criticism, of which ufology has a rich, proud
history. Every serious ufologist has participated in it at one
time or another, including Kevin, Dick, and me, and it looks as
if Bobbie is doing the same right now.

 >no unity among the name researchers and noted ufologists. And
 >that is exactly why a man like Greer has captured the attention
 >of we the people.

"Unity of the name researchers" has zero to do with Greer's
headline-grabbing. This is a free society, he is a free man, and
he can say and do what he wants.

 >Whether he is actually accomplishing anything
 >or not, he at least is giving the _appearance_ that he is. And
 >since we the people aren't interested in fact and data and
 >truth, according to this post of yours, we the people are
 >gravitating toward Greer and losing faith in the ufologists and
 >researchers we've looked up to all these years.

On the subject of policing, Greer has often been criticized by
serious ufologists, who most recently have had a field day doing
so on this List. But this is a free country, and there is - and
should be - no way to restrain Greer from exercising his free
speech, however lamentable its content.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 18:56:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:47:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:47:49 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

 >>Not your welfare Dave, god you know how twist things. Who would
 >have guessed you were or are a journo? It was your statement on
 >how you are non-emotive on this subject, and are only interested
 >in why people think they exist. I feel you did not have this in
 >mind when you were debating the Sheffield case with Max. I lost
 >count how many times you ridiculed him.

Hi Roy,

You are the one doing the 'twisting'. Hypocrisy has got nothing
to do with this issue. I remain non-emotive about the possible
existence or non-existence of ET, as my interest lies in
individual and cultural perceptions in general.

As regards the Burns issue you appear to be suggesting that I
mixed up 'emotiveness' within the context of the debate with
being a journalist. Firstly, its erroneous to suggest
journalists don't get 'emotive' about subjects they write about
or investigate - some of the best known journalists are the ones
like Duncan Campbell who spend all their lives campaigning
around issues dear to their heart (be that nuclear disarmament,
freedom of information or whatever), so the idea that
journalists are always un-emotive in their writings is nonsense.
Newspapers would be pretty dull if that were the case!

With regards to the particular saga that you are obsessing
about, the facts are that I wrote about 4 articles for the
Sheffield Star relating to this particular incident. None of
these referred to the eponymous Mr Burns, but stuck to the facts
of the report and its resolution. They are a matter of record.
Given the fact that the incident took place near Sheffield and I
was regarded as the 'expert' on such matters it wasn't so
surprising that I should be asked to cover it. In hindsight, I
wish I hadn't bothered, as Ufology deserves the likes of Burns.
Next time I will strive to encourage a myth to grow, rather than
try to make a stand for common sense - it might be more fun.

My public debate over this incident is also a matter of record,
but I fail to see how my stance can be construed as "hypocrisy".
If it became emotive it did so because certain parties refused
to accept the facts and insisted on building a conspiracy where
none existed. Burns chose to link his arrest and conviction with
UFOs and then complained when he was ridiculed for doing so. And
I see Roy that even today you are following the same tired
pattern of seeing conspiracies around every corner. Can you
blame anyone for becoming "emotive" in such circumstances, after
all we are all human (well, those without a green skin!)

As for Burns' trial, this was in fact covered by the Star's
veteran Crown Court correspondent Roy Emery, who followed its
progress as a matter of course. I was given the opportunity of
covering it but felt it was unethical to do so - hardly
'hypocritical', rather the opposite. At the end of the day I
supplied Roy with what background information I had, as that's
how journalists work, but then I don't want to bore you and the
List with more tiresome biography.

As for my 'ridicule' of the claims he made, I stand by every
single word.


Dave Clarke








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                          Secrecy News -- 05/15/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:02:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:49:06 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/15/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 15, 2001

**      UNPUBLISHED COURT DECISIONS CHALLENGED
**      1968 NUCLEAR ACCIDENT DOCUMENTED
**      ANOTHER INTELLIGENCE REVIEW ORDERED


UNPUBLISHED COURT DECISIONS CHALLENGED

The American judicial system is becoming increasingly
unpredictable due to the widespread practice of withholding
appellate court decisions from publication.  Because court
rulings cannot be cited as precedent unless they are published,
critics say that unpublished decisions undermine judicial
consistency, erode litigants' expectation of equal protection
under the law and encourage ad hoc rulings by judges.

Thirty years ago, all decisions were published and could be
cited as precedent.  In the US Court of Appeals today, 85% of
all decisions are said to be unpublished following a slow,
steady mutation of judicial practice under the pressure of
increased litigation.

The problem was highlighted by a peculiar May 4 ruling in the US
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The Court was considering whether to impose sanctions on an
attorney because she cited an unpublished opinion in a brief, in
defiance of Court rules.  In the end, the Court decided not to
impose the sanctions but warned that this was a unique case and
others might not be so lucky.

The underlying issue in the case, it might be noted, was whether
or not the police are required to give warning to a suspect
before unleashing a police dog.  That serious question remains
legally unsettled because the Court's decision on that point
remains unpublished and therefore cannot serve as precedent or
as a reliable basis for police procedure.

In what might be a first, the Ninth Circuit cited the U.S.
Supreme Court's widely reviled decision in Gore v. Bush -- which
terminated the 2000 election -- to justify its insistence that
its ruling applied only to the present case.  (The Supreme Court
had stated there that "Our consideration is limited to the
present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in
election processes generally presents many complexities.")

See the text of the May 4 Ninth Circuit ruling here:

        http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/05/sorchini.html

Michael Schmier, who was a candidate for Attorney General in
California in 1998, was prevented by the California Supreme
Court from including discussion of this issue in his candidate
statement that was mailed to California voters.  His statement,
which was entirely blanked out in the voter handbook, included
these remarks:

"Secret rulings do not serve as future guidelines, even in the
same court.  They enable judges to ignore the law, knowing this
injustice is hidden.  Corruption and arrogance fester at every
level because precedent is destroyed.  Feedback to the public,
necessary to correct abuses, is prevented."

Schmier's brother, attorney Ken Schmier, leads a burgeoning
campaign to reverse the trend toward nonpublication of judicial
decisions.  He has assembled a variety of resources on this
issue which are available here:

        http://www.nonpublication.com/


1968 NUCLEAR ACCIDENT DOCUMENTED

The publication of the State Department's Foreign Relations of
the United States (FRUS) volume on Western Europe last month was
the culmination of two fierce battles over declassification.
One concerned the disclosure of CIA covert action in Italy in
the 1960s, as discussed in Secrecy News, 05/02/01.

The other declassification dispute was over publication of
documents concerning the crash of a U.S. B-52 bomber carrying
four thermonuclear bombs near Thule Air Force Base in Greenland
in 1968.  Though there was no nuclear explosion, the
conventional high explosive in the bombs was detonated,
scattering radioactive debris.

All of this is fairly well documented in the published
literature.

Nevertheless, the State Department and the Defense Department
"fought like blazes not to release the documents on the Thule
crash," according to a historian involved in the process.  The
State Department was apparently concerned about possible adverse
diplomatic reaction from Denmark.  The Defense Department
habitually claims that the locations of nuclear weapons must be
classified, even when the information is decades old.

The agencies' opposition to publication of documents on the
Thule accident was overcome only when it was discovered that the
documents were already available in the public domain!
"Eventually we found most of them already declassified at NARA
or the LBJ Library," the historian said.  Ironically, other
documents were found in a Danish government publication.

The entire FRUS volume, including the contested Thule records
(see documents 1 through 24), is posted here:

        http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xii/


ANOTHER INTELLIGENCE REVIEW ORDERED

On May 9, President Bush ordered yet another review of the U.S.
intelligence bureaucracy.  The President instructed DCI George
Tenet to convene two panels, including one comprised of
non-governmental experts, to assess the state of U.S.
intelligence and to recommend appropriate changes.

There is no reason to expect much from the latest review.
George Tenet, who has sworn under oath that disclosure of the
aggregate intelligence budget number could damage U.S. national
security, is unlikely to be the instrument of fresh thinking or
fundamental reform.

But fresh thinking and fundamental reform are just what is
needed, according to Gregory F. Treverton, author of the new
book "Reshaping National Intelligence for an Age of Information"
(Cambridge University Press, 2001).

The world of 2010, Treverton writes, "will require intelligence
to be dispersed, not concentrated; open to a variety of sources,
not limited to secrets; sharing its information and analyses
with a variety of would-be coalition partners, including
foreigners and people outside government, not guarding its
'secrets' tightly."

Much of the book recounts the intelligence debates and debacles
of the 1990s and will be familiar to many readers.  Yet
Treverton, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence
Council, leavens his account of recent history with some
startling anecdotes.  For example:

"In the autumn of 1990, my predecessors at the National
Intelligence Council predicted Yugoslavia's tragedy with a
prescience that is awe inspiring.  The national intelligence
estimate, or NIE, concluded that Yugoslavia's breakup was
inevitable.  The breakup would be violent, and the conflict
might expand....  Yet so far as I can tell, the NIE had no
effect [on policy].  None."

Treverton proposes a practical agenda including improved
exploitation of open sources and increased utilization of
outside experts.  Above all, he says repeatedly, "the margin of
what is debated publicly needs to be dramatically widened."
Intelligence needs to "make its case publicly."

That view is not widely shared inside the bureaucracy.
According to the Washington Post, the latest intelligence review
was mandated by President Bush's National Security Presidential
Directive 5.  An NSC staff member said that neither the
Directive nor a fact sheet describing its contents would be
released.

******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of A
merican Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org> with this comman
d in the body of the message:
        subscribe secrecy_news [your email address]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, send email to <majordomo@fas.org> with this command in the body
of the message:
        unsubscribe secrecy_news [your email address]
Secrecy News is archived at:
        http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email:  saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                  Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 15 May 2001 12:28:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:57:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton


 >Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:06:52 -0700
 >From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer

 >>From: skywatcher22@space.com
 >>Date: 12 May 2001 06:35:24 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Project Disclosure & Greer - Hamilton

 >>>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >>>From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>My Look at Project Disclosure

 >>>by Don Ecker
 >>>Director of Research
 >>>UFO Magazine

 >><snip>

 >>>To enjoy peace one must be prepared for war. Not a pleasant
 >>>thought, to be sure, but a true one, nonetheless. And I have
 >>>found in years past that the "useful idiots" don't often like
 >>>dealing with the facts of a situation. And even though I applaud
 >>>Greer for his efforts with the Disclosure Project, I still
 >>>believe he and Carol Rosin are "useful idiots."

 >>Don,

 >>I forwarded your comments to my new friend, Carol Rosin. She is
 >>new to the UFO business, does not fully get along with Greer, is
 >>a peacenik, but has a strong stand on weapons in space. I am
 >>sure you wouldn't mind hearing her comments in reply.

 >>Bill Hamilton


 >*****************************************************

 >Bill:

 >I put out my essay for a reason. It is on enough sites that I was
 >sure Ms. Rosin would see it. By all means, I am interested in
 >her response. However, I hope you sent it in its entirety.

 >Don Ecker

Don,

I sent the entirety of your message, however, I received a
message back that informed that her mailbox was full. While at
this event she has not checked her email messages. I will call
her tomorrow and see if she will empty some of her mailbox so I
can resend it.

Bill H








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:20:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 22:15:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:21:43 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I have attempted to avoid this fight, and I believe that Greg
 >can defend himself quite well, however, I might throw a little
 >fuel on the fire. I know that Corso (and not co-author Birnes)
 >lied, at least twice.

Twice, is that all? How many times have you lied; and not little
white lies but big ones, and not about something as unimportant
as rank or a long ago held command but about very important
information?

One of the most serious setbacks for the entire Roswell story,
especially among young intellectuals, was a 1995 article which
appeared in Omni Magazine: 'The Case Of the Vanishing Nurses' by
Paul McCarthy. The entire UFO community was made to look foolish
and just plain dumb. And you and Don were the main characters.
Do you remember? Even though I felt the way you both dealt with
McCarthy was less than professional, I still think you provide
the list with important information. I don't question the
honesty of what you write to us just because I know that you and
Don weren't entirely honest with Omni.

I'd like folks to take another look at what Col. Corso was
saying and read 'The Day After Roswell' but you and others on
the List keep insisting it's all bull and try to blunt the
discussion. It's also clear that many of Col. Corso's critics
haven't actually read the book, carefully or any other way.

Col. Corso was a human and he made some mistakes but to
disregard his message is playing right into the hands of the
controllers, men like Richard Armitage.

"...The Col.(Corso) had a great deal of credibility and
expertise not only as a military officer but also in the fields
of intelligence and national security...and he very quickly
became a valued source of bountiful information that was
insightful and most important, accurate." Senator Strom
Thurmond


Ed

PS And we should give Dr. Greer a chance to see what he and
those who've put themselves on the line are able to accomplish.
Whatever you, Stan, Greg, Jenny and Bruce have been trying to
do, hasn't been working.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 15

                           Plunkett And The Beasts

From: "Bill Chalker" <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 22:24:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 22:24:49 -0400
Subject: Plunkett And The Beasts


Given Dennis Plunkett's "termination" of the British Flying
Saucer Bureau (BFSB) after nearly 50 years, due to the "end of
the UFO era", the following might put his rather spurious
comments in a better perspective.

Browsing past issues of FSR I came across "A voice from the
past" by E. L. Plunkett, Vol.21, No. 6, April, 1976, pg. 11. One
passage is amusing in today's light, some 25 years later, namely
Plunkett's comment: "In the early sixties I had to forgo
"saucers" due to my job taking up my evenings and often
week-ends but the Committee of BFSB carried on. The day came
when earning a living became more of a problem, and eventually
it was decided to terminate the BFSB and keep only the Committee
going."

A "serial terminator"? The article also clarifies Plunkett's
claim of BFSB's 1500 membership. He was talking about the IFSB
(Albert K. Bender's US based International Flying Saucer Bureau)
re worldwide membership until it nosedived into "MIB oblivion"
in 1953. I would query even this claim of 1500
internationationally for Bender's IFSB, but it seems somehow
that IFSB's "1500" may have became blurred to BFSB "1500".
Typically parts of the media took Plunkett's announcement of the
closure of his BFSB as evidence of the end of the UFO era.

Rather than actually seriously evaluate the claim some of media
drew a long bow and fired a limp arrow at the heart of the "UFO
beast" - an animal which, although in need of serious attention,
due to its often unpredictable and self-destructive nature, is
still very much alive and kicking. Much of this destructive
nature comes from its apparent need to run with the pack.

That pack is often made up of less attractive beasts such as
pseudo-ufological beasts, often seen preening themselves in
conference circuit displays, sunning themselves in uncritical
forums, and lifting their legs on many needy ufological
"bushes". There are many uncritical, opportunistic and psychotic
beasts in this pack. Perhaps the nicest thing that could be done
is to gently put them down. If you don't have the stomach for
that, then perhaps the real "UFO beast" could be led to better
pastures, where it can run free of the drooling pack.

I can feel the pack biting now. I'll just get my "4x2" lump of
wood to try to wack a few of these bastards. Maybe they'll all
do us a favour and find something better to to do.


Regards,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 16

                            Rogue River Sighting

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:53:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:27:53 -0400
Subject: Rogue River Sighting


Case 10 of the "Twelve Good Unknowns" reported in Project Blue
Book Special Report #14 was an "enigma wrapped in a mystery"
until I investigated the Blue Book microfilm file at the
National Archives and (finally!) found the original data
(witness interviews). Now the case is "merely" an enigma.

I mentioned it when I saw the George Filer (Filer's Files) had
recently posted a sighting from the Rogue River area several
weeks ago.

What was that pancake-shaped object/craft, anyway?

I invite you to see for yourself and try to explain this enigma.
Go to:

http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue River.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 16

                             Scotland FT Article

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:38:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:45:01 -0400
Subject: Scotland FT Article


Dear Colleagues,

Please find attached a link to a new article on my site.
http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/scotFT.html

The article written by UK author/researcher Christopher Martin,
refers to a recent trip that Chris made to Scotland.

It is an interesting article, and please also note the header
picture is an accurate depiction of the object and sighting
conditions.

Chris recently appeared on the UK's most watched morning TV show
'This Morning' on ITV. Since that appearance Chris has been
contacted by major media outlets here in the UK, including Sky
TV and Channel 5. If you have Sky TV, Chris will be debating
live, with Nick Pope, Timothy Good amongst others on channel 461
" Where it's at TV " this will be live tonight at 8pm UK time
16/5/01.

Best Regards,

Roy Hale
Editor: Down To Earth Magazine on the Net:
http://www.thelosthaven.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 16

                      'Chupacabras' Attack Pregnant Dog

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:26:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:53:53 -0400
Subject: 'Chupacabras' Attack Pregnant Dog


We invite you visit our Bloodpredator web page with the latest
investigation of a horrible attack on a pregnant dog by a
Chupacabra in Chile, on April 18, 2001, by our asociate Mr.
Jaime Ferrer of the Calama UFO Center.

We posted it, so you can see and evaluate one example of
our field investigation - grotesque work. Nothing nice, but
someone has to do it.

http://ufomiami.homestead.com/PERRA.html

WARNING:

The 14 photographs shown are very graphic. If you are a
sensitive person do not visit it.


Sincerely,


Dr. Virgilio Snchez-Ocejo

Chupacabras
http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 16

             PRG Press Release - 05/17/01 - Paradigm Clock Reset

From: Steve Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 17:01:28 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 23:15:41 -0400
Subject: PRG Press Release - 05/17/01 - Paradigm Clock Reset


PRG
Paradigm Research Group

Press Release May 17,
2001

Washington, DC - The Paradigm Clock has been reset to 11:59 pm
(one minute to midnight). Based upon recent developments shown
below, the clock has been moved forward 50 seconds.

The Paradigm Clock resides at the Paradigm Research Group
website: www.paradigmclock.com. It is a metaphor representing
the proximity to formal disclosure by world governments of the
ongoing presence of extraterrestrial life forms in our world,
now. It is modeled after the "Doomsday Clock"; first published
in 1947 by the "Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.". Midnight on the
Doomsday Clock meant nuclear war had begun. Midnight on the
Paradigm Clock will mean formal disclosure of the ET presence
has taken place.

Clock History:

April 30,1998: Published to the Web, time 11:57:00 pm
July 27, 1998: Time reset back to 11:56:30 pm
July 28, 1999: Time reset forward to 11:57:15 pm
July 14, 2000: Time reset forward to 11:58:10.

5/10/01 to 5/16/01 - the media coverage of the Disclosure
Project press coverage is extensive and international. Further,
the webcast archived at:

www.connectlive.com/events/disclosureproject

of the press conference by Connect Live receives several hundred
thousand log-ins. Other news entities indicate further coverage
is

pending. The following websites are monitoring this media coverage:

www.disclosureproject.org
www.paradigmclock.com
www.x-ppac.org
www.enterprisemission.com
http://home.sprynet.com/~pnahay

5/9/01 - the Disclosure Project [ www.disclosureproject.org ]
holds a press conference at the National Press Club in
Washington, DC where the testimony of 75 witnesses, mostly
former military and government agency employees, to UFO/ET
evidence and events was presented to the national and
international press. A 4-hour tape condensing 120 hours of
witness interviews is presented along with a substantial
briefing document. Twenty-one of the witnesses are present and
recount their testimony at the press conference and subsequent
meetings on Capitol Hill.

5/5/01 - Yale educated astronomer Thomas Van Flandern presents a
compendium of evidence for artificial structures on Mars at a
press conference held at the National Press Club in Washington,
DC. It is webcast worldwide and archived at:

www.connectlive.com/events/metaresearch

by Connect Live. The PowerPoint presentation itself can be found
at:

www.metaresearch.org

2/25/01 - Arthur C. Clarke meets with astronaut Buzz Aldrin in Sri
Lanka with Andrew Chaikin, editor of Space.com's Space Illustrated
Magazine, listening in. He states, "I'm fairly convinced that we have
discovered life on Mars. There are some incredible photographs
from [the Jet Propulsion Laboratory], which to me are pretty
convincing proof of the existence of large forms of life on Mars!
Have a look at them. I don't see any other interpretation."

www.space.com/peopleinterviews/clarke_believe_010227.html


This view is restated numerous times over the ensuing weeks. In
the Aldrin meeting Clarke also broaches the issue of zero point
energy and states, "I'm now convinced that there are new
forms of energy, which we are tapping, and they make even
nuclear energy look trivial in comparison. And when we control
those energy sources, the universe will open up."

Contact: Stephen Bassett
  301-990-4290
  ParadigmRG@aol.com

______________________________________________________

  Paradigm Research Group
  URL: www.paradigmclock.com
  E-mail: ParadigmRG@aol.com
  Phone: 301-990-4290
  Fax: 301-990-0199
  4938 Hampden Lane, #161
_____________________________________________________

  "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
  if you are willing to give away the credit."
_____________________________________________________

  "The truth costs money. Lies, on the other hand,
  will be provided to you for 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 16

                   Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs?

From: Joe McGonagle <joe@mcgonaglenet.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:15:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:36:07 -0400
Subject: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs?


Someone has told me about a document on page 34 of 66 in an FBI FOIA file
at:

http://foia.fbi.gov/ufo/ufo8.pdf

The document is dated 22nd March 1950 and alludes to the
retrieval of 3 flying discs and 9 occupants brought down by a
high-powered radar intstallation. No date is evident for the
alleged event, and the only location given is "New Mexico".

Is anyone aware of this document, or any follow-up that has been
carried out about it?


Regards,

Joe










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 16

                    Birnes On Corso - CNI News - 06-16-97

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:50:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:49:52 -0400
Subject: Birnes On Corso - CNI News - 06-16-97



        CNI News -- Vol. 3, No. 7, Part 1 -- June 16, 1997
        Global News on Contact with Non-human Intelligence
==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

<snip>

CO-AUTHOR OF BOMBSHELL ROSWELL BOOK SPEAKS OUT
William Birnes on Himself, UFOs, Impressions of Col. Corso

[CNI News thanks William J. Birnes, co-author (with Col. Philip
Corso) of the new bombshell book "The Day After Roswell," for
this exclusive interview in which he discusses his involvement
with the book and his candid impressions of the man behind the
story, Col. Philip Corso.]


CNI News: Please tell us a little about your background:
schooling, profession, military involvement, other publications
-- anything you'd like our readers to know about you.

William Birnes: I'm a 52-year-old writer, editor, book
publisher, and literary rights agent in New York and Los
Angeles. I write mostly true crime, but have done some celebrity
books and sports biographies. By training, I'm an academic with
a Ph.D. in Medieval Literature and Linguistics from N.Y.U. I
taught English and Linguistics on both undergraduate and
graduate levels for many years at what is now called the College
of New Jersey. When I taught there it was called Trenton State
College. I have been an NEH fellow and an NEH grants judge. I've
never served in the military.

CNI: How would you describe your orientation to the UFO subject?
Prior to working with Corso, were you familiar with UFO research
and lore? Did you have a personal opinion on the "reality" of
UFOs as unusual aircraft of possibly non-human origin?

WB: I was a UFO literary and movie"fan" with a cursory
background into the research. I'd read Kevin Randle and Stan
Friedman, saw all the relevant documentaries, knew the lore of
Roswell and spoken with people in Roswell who had claimed to
have knowledge of the 1947 incident. I had heard "stories" about
a group called MJ-12 and, of course, read about it in books, but
had no direct knowledge of it. I'd spoken to some pilots who's
claimed to have had encounters and had heard stories about UFOs
in Mexico and Brazil. But I had no direct knowledge of any UFO
encounters except through second-hand or third-hand sources.

CNI: How did you come to collaborate with Col. Corso on this
project? When did your collaboration begin and how did it
develop?

WB: I was brought to Col. Corso by a Los Angeles motion picture
company that was working with him on his World War II and Korean
War Army Intelligence experiences. I was particularly interested
in writing a book with him on his tour of duty in Rome when he
managed to arrange for the escape of a Jewish displaced war
refugee camp from Rome to Palestine right under the noses of the
British and the Soviet NKVD units operating in Rome. But after
developing a book outline for this, I learned about Col. Corso's
experiences as a member of the U.S. Senate Internal Security
subcommittee in 1963 and his investigation of the Warren
Commission (all of it documented) and I really got intrigued.

It was only after we'd talked about what kinds of books we
wanted to do that [Col. Corso] confided in me that he'd had
another job when he was at the Pentagon from 1961-1963 which
concerned the development of U.S. weapons technology from
"foreign" or "alien" sources. Ultimately, he told me that he had
information from the Roswell crash that had been kept in the
Army files since 1947 and gradually put into development. When
it became his time to take over the files, he was in charge of
the anti-missile missile, military applications for the
already-in-development laser, a night vision lens, and the
high-energy kinetic electron beam. The inspiration for all of
these devices, he said, came from files the Army kept on the
technology of the devices retrieved from Roswell. The cover for
this "alien" technology development was the routine Army weapons
development program. He showed me the development histories of
these weapons and from what I could see, the cover worked
perfectly. Things just seemed to "appear" in development without
any previous history. Of course, nobody wrote down anything
about Roswell.

CNI: What else can you say about Corso's background and overall
credibility?

WB: Phil Corso was an Army Intelligence officer trained by the
British. His records were covered up by his bosses at the
Pentagon because he had made intelligence discoveries (not
related to Roswell) that put his life in danger. I have seen
some of the classified information he developed and it amounts
to nothing less than a "secret history of the United States."
I'm almost afraid to talk [about] some of this stuff. But the
man is as credible as they come. He was responsible for POW
exchanges, had sources deep inside the KGB, fought a real battle
for over fifteen years with the CIA, and saved the life of House
Speaker McCormick in the hours after JFK was assassinated in
Texas. I've even managed to confirm through columnist Paul Scott
(now in his 90's, I think) that it was Corso who leaked
information about the Soviet IRBMs [intermediate range missiles]
in Cuba in 1962 because the president wasn't going to do
anything about them. Corso's as real as they come.

CNI: While you worked with Corso, was there any point at which
your own sense of reality was challenged by his claims? If so,
what caused that to happen for you?

WB: I was frankly amazed at the matter-of-fact way in which
Corso recounted the day-to-day operations of slipping alien
technology into the R&D units of large corporations. His facile
way of dealing with large companies through the offices of
General Trudeau showed me just how narrow the line is between
the military and corporate America. Maybe it's different today,
but back in the 1960s, while JFK was talking about idealism and
altruism, the military was fighting its own war both within
government, with the Soviets and their satellite nations, and
with some alien presence that the military believed was hostile.
It was as if there was an entire universe during the early 1960s
that was completely invisible unless you knew it was there. More
than ever, Phil Corso's revelations pointed me in the direction
of a "secret American history" that is still unfolding today.

CNI: Turning now to the specifics in the book, does Corso state
as fact that alien (i.e. off-world, non-human) artifacts have
been acquired by the U.S. government?

WB: Yes. Said artifacts were part of the Roswell debris
delivered to the Pentagon from Wright Field and were stored in
R&D files for over ten years before anyone tried to harvest
them. Corso handled some of these artifacts, especially the
cracker-sized IC wafers, a fiber-optic harness, and some kind of
metallic headband, and tried to determine what use they had.

CNI: And does Corso state as fact that alien bodies have been
acquired by the U.S. government?

WB: Corso saw one of the alien bodies floating in some kind of
gel in a casket at Fort Riley in 1947 and reviewed the Army
autopsy of an alien body while he was at the Pentagon. He
describes what the Army pathologists speculated upon in his
book.

CNI: In your understanding, why is Corso writing this book now?

WB: Corso says that now that everybody is dead, especially his
boss, Arthur Trudeau, he feels comfortable talking about the
Foreign Technology section of Army R&D. Five years ago, he
wouldn't have compiled this manuscript or dared to describe what
he did. But, now, he says, there really is no reason to keep
these facts hidden. Besides, he believes he's part of the
disclosure.

CNI: Do you think Corso has put himself (his reputation, his
military pension, his life) at risk by publishing this book?

WB: Although his pension is not at issue, nor is his life, there
are people -- friends of his from his military days -- who've
suggested that the public really shouldn't be entrusted with
this information and it's better left unspoken. Also, very few
people currently in the government want to be identified with
the Roswell story because of the ongoing controversy. Clearly,
Phil Corso has opened up some of this controversy to public
scrutiny, and it's bound to cause some waves.

CNI: Senator Strom Thurmond, who wrote the foreword to the book,
told the Associated Press on June 5 that he was not properly
informed on the content of the book and now wants to distance
himself from it. According to the press statement, Thurmond was
told that the book was to be a memoir titled "I Walked with
Giants: My Career in Military Intelligence," and that there was
"'absolutely no mention, suggestion or indication' that the book
dealt with UFOs and a government conspiracy to hide the
existence of such space vehicles." On learning the actual
content of the book, Thurmond stated that "I did not, and would
not, pen the foreword to a book about, or containing, a
suggestion that the success of the United States in the Cold War
is attributable to the technology found on a crashed UFO." Mr.
Birnes, how do you respond to these statements?

WB: I want to set the record straight on this. I've read a
number of articles in which Thurmond's staff has cited a book
entitled "I Walked with Giants" as the book for which the
senator claims to have written the foreword. This is patently
incorrect. The truth is that the foreword the senator wrote for
Phil Corso's first manuscript "I Walked with Giants" was
returned to him by Col. Corso, who requested that he write a NEW
foreword for his book "The Day After Roswell." Col. Corso spoke
to Senator Thurmond in person in DC and told him what he was
writing in "The Day After Roswell," and that he was even
including an anecdote about [the senator] in the book. Senator
Thurmond agreed to write the new foreword -- which he did -- and
sent it to Corso. I have copies of both forewords as well as
Thurmond's signed release to use his new foreword in "The Day
After Roswell."

It's quite possible that, for whatever reason, Senator
Thurmond's staff never realized that the senator had agreed to
write a foreword for a book about UFOs and the military's
harvest of alien technology. But the senator did agree, and we
have his signed release.

==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

Michael Lindemann
Editor, CNI News

==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 00:33:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:02:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young


 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:11:37 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 01:39:15 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I think that the Gallup Poll, some years ago, got a response of
 >>about 11 percent for the number of adult Americans who said that
 >>they had seen a UFO, themselves.

 >>That puts me with the other 89 percent people.

 >Hey Bob,

 >Come on print the real stats, you think?

The 1973 Gallup Poll:  11 % of Adult Americans questioned said
that they had seen a UFO, themselves.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:08:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:04:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:25:00 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >To a skeptical mind if a witness described a "glowing, disk
 >shaped UFO that had the brightness of a meteor.." it translates
 >out to "blah blah blah blah blah blah meteor blah blah.
 >Naturally the skeptical mind would instantly label the case as a
 >meteor.

 >In this particular case we ignore everything except for "bright
 >point of light" and naturally Venus comes to mind.

Yes, because Venus was at that very moment a bright point of
light in the Eastern sky in the direction that the two hour chase
occurred. And the object disappeared with dawn. Also, the
witnesses didn't report another bright light, Venus, in the same
direction.

 >Pretty simple being a skeptic isn't it..... :)

It is, if one doesn't automatically jump to the conclusion,
first, that a flying saucer must have been involved just because
a witness described the visual appearance of Venus as a "disk".

Assume that Venus is some sort of object with a shape, squint at
it closely, be sure that your eyeglasses are on, and clean, and
that your car's windshield is spotless, and then try to figure
out what that shape is. Anyone with slight astigmatism will see
an oval shape. Anybody else will also see beams of light caused
by one's eyelashes, moving back and forth as one moves one's
head.

Happens all the time. How else would we have all of those Venus
IFOs?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                  EW News: 05-17-01 The Allies of Humanity

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:59:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:06:57 -0400
Subject: EW News: 05-17-01 The Allies of Humanity



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

The Electric Warrior : News May 17, 2001
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0020.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
ufo & eti news

THE ALLIES OF HUMANITY : A LETTER FROM THE PUBLISHER

From: Michael Brownlee
Visibiliti Unlimited, LLC

Once in a great while, a book appears of such universal
importance and urgency that conscience demands it be made
available quickly to people everywhere while setting aside the
usual considerations of commerce. It is my conviction that The
Allies of Humanity: An Urgent Message About the Extraterrestrial
Presence in the World Today is such a book.

Visibiliti Unlimited, in a joint effort with New Knowledge
Library, is immediately releasing The Allies of Humanity in
several electronic formats for free and unlimited distribution.
As of today, readers will be able to access the complete text of
this exceptional document at three Internet locations:
www.visibiliti.com, www.alliesofhumanity.org, and
www.cogenesis.com.

I wish to explain what compels us to take this extraordinary
action now.

Last week marked the launch of the Disclosure Project in
Washington, D.C., an historic attempt to gain official and
public recognition of the now well-documented reality that
extraterrestrial beings are visiting our planet. Presenting
long-withheld testimony by more than 100 witnesses - all with
impressive military, intelligence, government, corporate, or
scientific credentials - who claim to have first-hand knowledge
about UFOs and extraterrestrial visitation events, the
Disclosure Project powerfully demonstrates that the earth is
indeed being visited by technologically-advanced
extraterrestrial civilizations, and that spacecraft of
extraterrestrial origin have been downed, secretly retrieved,
and studied since at least the 1940s.

Strangely, however, the focus of the Disclosure Project
revelations is not about the extraterrestrial presence itself.
Instead, the primary thrust appears to be an attempt force
the release of free-energy and anti-gravity technologies
which have allegedly been covertly reverse-engineered from
recovered ETV (extraterrestrial vehicles) and subsequently
suppressed. (Somewhat incongruently, the project is also
calling for a unilateral and permanent ban on all space-
based weapons on the grounds that the extraterrestrial
visitors have not yet demonstrated overt hostility towards
humanity.)

The weight and credibility of the evidence being presented in
connection with the Disclosure Project, added to more than fifty
years of public and private research into the extraterrestrial
issue, together with the long-suppressed information that is now
finally being leaked, all powerfully confirm the reality of an
ongoing extraterrestrial visitation to earth. Thus, the
presentation of this evidence can be considered a breakthrough
in humanity's understanding that we are not alone in the
universe, that we are rapidly emerging into a new era of direct
contact with intelligent life from beyond our planetary sphere.

However, despite the huge body of compelling evidence that is
now at last being made public, what is most troubling to many
researchers is that almost nothing is known about the identity,
origins, motivations, ethics, and intentions of the
extraterrestrials themselves. In fact, there is much to suggest
that our visitors may have played a significant role in
obscuring such information. As noted author Whitley Strieber has
said, "The secrecy has two origins: us, and the entity we face."

Indeed, to those who have devoted years to arduous study of this
challenging issue, the single most consistent characteristic of
extraterrestrial phenomena is how thoroughly elusive, enigmatic,
and mysterious the visitors seem to be. Much of the evidence -
ranging from radar reports and landing traces, to contactee and
abductee accounts - is highly contradictory or ambiguous in
nature, making definitive conclusions seemingly impossible.
Unfortunately, this has led some people to assume that the very
idea of an extraterrestrial presence must therefore be bogus,
the obsession of deluded crackpots.

All that may be about to change, for The Allies of Humanity
appears to provide crucial information about our clandestine
visitors, from a most unusual perspective. This rare document
appears to be an authentic communiqu from non-terrestrial but
flesh-and-blood beings who have stationed themselves at a secret
location within our solar system to observe and report on an
"alien intervention" unfolding on and around our planet. The
Allies essentially claim to be off-world spies who have accepted
the challenging mission of providing intelligence to humanity
that we could not otherwise readily obtain.

 From what I have been able to determine after months of
considering this simple but profound message, the Allies'
characterization of our extraterrestrial visitors may well
explain and account for virtually all of the complex evidence
that we have gathered to date regarding extraterrestrial
phenomena. Thus, regardless of how this information has come to
us, what the Allies reveal in their six brief discourses about
the behaviors, intentions and strategies of the extraterrestrial
visitors here seems to have the potential to finally bring to an
end the mystery, enigma, and ambiguity that have surrounded this
vital issue.

The original recipient of this extraordinary message is
spiritual teacher and award-winning author Marshall Vian
Summers, who for nearly twenty years has been quietly teaching
and writing about a spirituality that at its core acknowledges
the reality that humanity lives in a vast and populated universe
and now needs to prepare for emergence into a Greater Community
of intelligent life. His first books, Steps to Knowledge: The
Book of Inner Knowing and Greater Community Spirituality: A New
Revelation (both published by New Knowledge Library), have
already been heralded as formulating "the first theology of
contact."

But with the recent transmission and publication of the
"underground edition" of The Allies of Humanity, Summers has
been suddenly if reluctantly thrust onto the world stage as the
first spiritual leader to sound a clear warning about an
extraterrestrial Intervention. "The other Disclosure that needs
to happen," he says now, "is the revelation of who the
extraterrestrial visitors are and why they are here." In
response to these revelations, drawn from the Allies' reports,
Summers urges sustained efforts towards public education,
preparation, and resistance.

Here's why: From their unique vantage point, the Allies' charge
that Earth's intruding extraterrestrial visitors are in reality
resource explorers and trade collectives secretly seeking to
gain competitive, economic, and psychological advantage in our
emerging world; their interests are fundamentally commercial.
Far from portraying these uninvited visitors as evil, the Allies
instead strongly suggest that while the extraterrestrial
intruders do indeed possess highly advanced technology and
uncanny abilities to be powerfully but subtly influential in the
"Mental Environment" (an arena where humans are famously
vulnerable), their morals, ethics, and spirituality are not
significantly more enlightened than that of humanity.

For some people, this may be the worst news of all, that the ETs
are more like us than different. As one former Episcopal priest
wrote this week, "My biggest concern in all this is that 'they'
will turn out to be morally like us - and then we're in for it.
We know, after all, what we do to each other, given the
circumstances and the opportunity."

The Allies propose that we have but to recall our own historical
experience of human intervention to gain insight into
extraterrestrial activities and motivations. They remind us, for
instance, of the incursion of European "civilization" into the
Americas beginning in the 15th century. Those opportunistic
visitors came in the name of God, exhibiting impressive
technology, and purporting to offer a more advanced and more
civilized way of life. Yet, they left in their wake a legacy of
unintended devastation, including the near-total elimination of
indigenous peoples and cultures.

I concur with Summers and the Allies that the radical and
wide-scale violation of fundamental freedoms that native
Americans experienced at the hands of the Europeans is a
powerful object lesson for our current predicament. Today it
appears that we are the Indians, and unless we can collectively
muster a more creative and unified response, we may suffer a
similar fate.

Earlier this year, sensing the importance of this document,
Visibiliti published a downloadable eBook version. Initial
response has been very encouraging, but we have felt that this
information needs to reach many more people. Therefore, given
the apparent urgency of our human situation and the profound
implications of this unusual message - and the historical timing
of the Disclosure Project - we have chosen to electronically
publish the entire text of The Allies of Humanity, making it
easily accessible at no cost to readers.

In the foreword, I state, "The message of The Allies of Humanity
challenges nearly all of our fundamental notions of reality,
simultaneously giving us our greatest opportunity for
advancement and our greatest challenge for survival. While the
current crisis threatens our self-determination as a species, it
may also provide a much-needed foundation upon which to bring
unity to the human race - a near impossibility without this
larger context. With the perspective offered in The Allies of
Humanity, we are given both the imperative and the inspiration
to join together in a deeper understanding to serve the further
evolution of humanity."

We strongly encourage readers to freely share this extraordinary
document with others, and to join in the ongoing discussion and
grassroots movement that are now spontaneously arising - for the
very future of humanity may well depend on how we collectively
respond to this message.


Copyright 2001 Visibiliti Unlimited, LLC
(Used by Permission)

------------------------------------------------------------
RELATED RESOURCES

Read The Allies of Humanity online or download your own copy
http://www.visibiliti.com/newallies/downloadallies.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
THE ELECTRIC WARRIOR
May 17, 2001
Silicon Valley, CA
http://www.electricwarrior.com

------------------------------------------------------------
Web developers, the URL address for this content is:
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0020.htm

Images are created exclusively for the Electric Warrior
Website. They can be downloaded and cached for individual
use, but may not be reproduced or used in any other context
without permission.

eWarrior@electricwarrior.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                           COMETA Media Coverage?

From: Haiko Lietz <haiko.lietz@web.de>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 12:57:34 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:11:22 -0400
Subject: COMETA Media Coverage?


Hello all,

I am compiling articles on the COMETA paper for an analysis of
UFO media coverage. Please assist in completing my list. I am
interested in coverage by the mass media (regional and national
radio, TV, press) and other publications that effectively effect
public opinion. So far I have:

FRANCE

21.07.99: Le canard enchan: "Frappes chirurgicales contre les
           Martiens"

21.07.99: Libration: "OVNI soit qui mal y pense" (Pierre
           Lagrange)

23.07.99: Denis Letty interview on France-Inter (radio)

05.08.99: L'Express: "Ovnis: un rapport dlirant" (Marc
           Traverson)

26.08.99: L'Express: "Droit de rponse: Rapport Cometa" (Denis
           Letty)

27.12.99: Libration: "En attendant E.T." (Alain Leauthier)

I know of an article in the newspaper "Ouest France" and another
radio interview on "Europe 2".


IRELAND

17.06.00: Irish Independent: "The truth is out there" (Leslie Kean)


USA

21.05.00: Boston Globe: "UFO theorists gain support abroad, but
repression at home" (Leslie Kean)


PORTUGAL

I heard the newspaper "Jornal de Noticias" had an article.

I also heard of articles in the UK, ITALY and SPAIN. Desired
info is the article itself and the position in newspaper/program
(size of headline, etc.).


Interesting facts like the following are welcome:

- the French TV show: "Plante Forum" on 01.10.1999 incl.
Velasco, Lagrange, Ribes said nothing on COMETA.

- the scientific journal "Intelligence and National Security"
(Issue 14.2) printed Gerald Haines' article "CIA's Role in the
Study of UFOs, 1947�1990: A Die-Hard Issue" in 1999. The
"electronic Telegraph" reported about it on 17.08.1999 ("X-Files
version of history is backed by CIA report" by Michael Smith)

All material I have compiled on COMETA so far can be viewed at
http://www.worldwidewar.net/kindofsource.htm

Of course I will inform the List, when my analysis is finished.


Sincerely

Yours

Haiko Lietz
Journalist
Germany

mailto:haiko.lietz@web.de
fon:++49 16 36 66 02 21










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 20

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 13:22:12 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:15:14 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 20


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

       UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 6, Number 20
May 17, 2001
Editor: Joseph Trainor


http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

WEIRD NEW "MANIMAL" APPEARS IN INDIA

"Some say the assaults are by a monkey; others claim that a
masked man is responsible But whatever it is, it has spread
panic in Ghaziabad" in India.

"The unknown creature has scratched many people and left the
authorities perplexed. There are cries of 'Kill him, kill him!'
in many localities after dark because that is when the
mysterious creature it seems to strike and at least a dozen
victims have received deep scratches in these 'attacks'"
Ghaziabad police commissioner "R.K. Chaturvedi said."

"And on Sunday (May 6, 2001) residents of Kala Bhatta stoned
cars, claiming they had seen a 'masked man' driving by. A woman
is alleged to have fainted at the sight."

(Editor's Comment: Since this "manimal" doesn't have a name yet,
let me suggest one. How about Hanuman, the monkey deity in the
Hindu epic Ramayana?)

In early April, the creature was confined to Vijay Nasir," a
town near Ghaziabad, "where it started 'biting' people" who were
sleeping outdoors on the street and in alleyways. "It was then
rumored to be a 'rogue monkey.'"

"The victims said it was a man with a monkey's face, which soon
became a 'masked man.'"

"On Monday, April 30 (2001), in the Kala Bhatta area, people
fired (guns) in the air to scare it away. It was seen in
Nasirpur, 3 kilometers (2 miles) away, during a power outage. He
had scratched the hand of a shopkeeper."

"The night of (Tuesday) May 1 (2001), the creature was sighted
in Anand Vihar. Hundreds of people with lahtis (a long hardwood
baton--J.T.) and sticks searched in vain for hours."

"In the Bulandshahr Road industrial area" of Ghaziabad, "three
workers were awakened and attacked. The masked man had allegedly
threatened to 'kill them.'"

"His language and accent were Bhojpuri, they claimed."

"According to local official Inderjit Verma, nobody has seen the
creature. 'It's all rumors,' he said, 'And none of the victims
has developed rabies, which is a natural consequence of a monkey
bite or scratch.'" (See the Times of India for May 8, 2001, "
masked man or monkey, it's a menace." Many thanks to Louise A.
Lowry for forwarding this newspaper article.)

(Editor's Note: In the Ramayana, Hanuman was the son of a nymph
and Vayu, the wind god. He assisted Rama, an incarnation of the
god Vishnu, in his quest to recover his wife Sita from the
demon-god Ravanna. Hanuman also commanded a legion of flying
monkeys which were said to have dug a big canal between India
and the original island of Sri Lanka, located where the Andaman
Islands are today.)

UFOs SIGHTED TWICE IN OREGON

Two UFO sightings were reported in Oregon last week, while Dr.
Steven Greer and the members of the Disclosure Project were
making their presentation at the National Press Club in
Washington, D.C.

On Saturday, May 5, 2001, in Ashland, Oregon, K.C. reports, "I
walked outside a friend's house at 8:30 p.m. and turned to look
up into the clear sky. Immediately I saw a bright flash where I
was looking, and it moved along, and then it disappeared. Four
objects came from all different directions. These others moved
across the sky in really straight trajectories to one point in
the sky that appeared within my immediate limited view of the
area. The disappeared after a minute or so."

On Wednesday, May 9, 2001, at at 7:30 p.m., K.C. was sitting in
the living room of his home in Phoenix, Oregon, watching a news
broadcast of the Disclosure Project proceedings in Washington,
D.C. when "I looked out the window in a northwesterly direction
and saw a large UFO moving rather slowly within the limited
field of view. "

He described the UFO as "a white light, sort of like a little
sun, very high, 10 miles (16 kilometers) up," and departed the
area at "several hundred miles per hour." (Email Form Report)

(Editor's Comment: K.C.'s wasn't the only UFO in Oregon that
night. Read on.)

LARGE TRIANGULAR UFO SEEN IN WASHINGTON STATE

On Wednesday, May 9, 2001, at 10:20 p.m., nearly three hours
after K.C.'s sighting in Oregon, John and Kim Novak and their
three-year-old son, ranch owner James Gilliland and one other
adult witness ""had just finished listening to the Art Bell
radio show" at the Sattva Institute (formerly the Self-Awareness
Earth Institute--J.T.) in Trout Lake, Washington "and went
outside and saw a large, very slow-moving triangular object
flying roughly right overhead."

According to John Novak, "It was first spotted underneath the
Big Dipper (Ursa Major--J.T.) and was headed in a southwest
direction at a very slow rate of speed."

The city of Portland, Oregon is approximately 40 miles (64
kilometers) southwest of Trout Lake, Wash.

Novak said the UFO "disappeared at above the trees going towards
the horizon. There was absolutely no sound."

"I extended my hand out at several times to gauge the size of it
and I was able to and I could just about cover it with my fist
(held at arm's length--J.T.) ," Novak said, "The entire length
of time it was in my view was approximately four to five
minutes."

"Either this was three independent lights, each about the size
of an average star in the sky, traveling in an absolutely
perfect triangular pattern, or it was one very large
triangular-shaped object."

"Another note of interest in this sighting is that Kim and I had
our three-year-old son out skywatching with us for the first
time. We asked him to show us where the spaceships were. He
pointed right to the area where the triangle was first spotted"
less than five minutes later. (any thanks to John Novak for this
report.)

(Editor's Note: That's two UFOs heading for Portland that
night--K.C.'s and the institute's. What's the big attraction in
Portland?)

GIGANTIC CRESCENT UFO SEEN IN AUSTRALIA

On Thursday, April 19, 2001, at 9:45 a.m., Elliott Daigleish
went for a stroll on Sunrise Beach in Byron Bay, Queensland,
Australia. Looking out over the Pacific Ocean, he blinked in
surprise "as a UFO appeared in front of me and then just
vanished."

"The object was 3 or 4 kilometers (2 or 3 miles) long. It had a
crescent shape with a light (aura) along the bottom and the top
of it. Little objects flew away from and back to the UFO. for
about 20 minutes. I believe it was a mothership, a huge white
UFO that made absolutely no sound. (Email Form Report)

FIRE POLTERGEIST STRIKES AGAIN IN CHILE

"All Tuesday night (May 8, 2001), a family in La Granja had to
stand guard to keep their house from being totally engulfed by
flames, which inexplicably appear at any place and time in a
spontaneous combustion case" which has already affected other
homes in this city in Chile.

"At midday yesterday (Wednesday, May 9, 2001) a great gout of
fire spread through a bedroom which is used as a storeroom at
8353 Pasaje 9 Ori Oriente in the center of the town of San
Gregorio. The situation caused hysteria among the house's five
adult occupants. and the one child, , since the fiery incidents
of the previous night had left them at their wits' end."

"Homeowner Jose Caceres could not go to his regular job at the
La Granja Municipal Library."

"On Tuesday night (May 8, 2001) a curtain caught fire in the
kitchen. When it was extinguished, another spurt of flame
erupted from a laundry hamper. Then something appeared in the
bedroom around my bed and also on the carpet,'" Caceres said, as
Carabineros (Chilean national police--J.T.) investigated the
scene.

"He added that this was the first time such a thing had occurred
since last year (2000) when two spontaneous combustion fires had
to be fought in that house."

"Sara Molina, the spouse of one of his (Caceres's) nephews, who
also lives in the house, said that a TV set and some curtains
had also caught fire and were consumed."

"The strangest thing is that a figure was seen by her and
another member of the clan."

"'Moments before, we saw the shadow of a figure wearing a coat,
which later disappeared,' stated the woman, with a broken
voice."

"The family has been living at this location for forty years but
is unsure whether they will remain there. Discarding the
possibility of short circuits, or a pyromaniac in the family,
the chance that there are occult forces at work here are
acquiring greater credence every day."

"'I think that a ritual (of exorcism) must be performed,' said
Yasmilla Mena, a neighbor who has witnessed the events."

"Nolberto Moya, a fire inspector for San Ramon, stated that the
corresponding experts' reports will be processed. However, given
his experience, he does not rule out the possibility that a
paranormal event might be at play."

No sooner had the firefighters left on Wednesday, May 9, 2001,
than new fires broke out in the house, causing the occupants to
remain vigilant." (See the Chilean newspaper La Cuarta for May
10, 2001, "Ghost causes fires at La Granja house." Muchas
gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros Chupacabras and
Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico, y Rodrigo Cuadra Salazar
para eso articulo de diari)

VOLCANO GODDESS HEXES FLORIDA TOURIST

"A man claims he was haunted by a Hawaiian volcano goddess after
taking rocks from the volcano."

"During a vacation trip to Hawaii Volcanoes National Park on the
big island of Hawaii, Timothy Murray scooped up (black volcanic)
sand with a (soda) pop bottle."

"After returning to his Florida home, his pet died, he split up
with his fiancee and FBI agents arrested him. He said he sent
the sand back and things are improving."

"He said, 'My life literally fell apart. One minute you're
working, and you're law-abiding, and you've got money in the
bank. The next, you are sitting in a federal penitentiary in
Miami. I couldn't believe what was happening to me.'"

"Even the FBI agents said they never arrest people for what he
did. 'They told me, 'You really must have pissed someone off.'
After some research, I figured out what it was.'"

"He believes Pele the (Hawaiian) volcano goddess apparently
punishes people who take anything belonging to her."

Murray sent the sand back to Hawaii, with a note reading,
"Please take this sand and put it back anywhere on your island.
I have had very bad luck since it came into my life and I am
very sorry I took it. Please forgive me and I pray that once I
send it back where it came from, my bad luck will go away."

"Park Ranger Terry Reveira said, 'As Hawaiians, we have been
raised to believe that when you are in nature, you ask
permission to take anything. That's true for rocks, too. I've
seen people take rocks from the park, and I know the rocks don't
want to go. On the way back to the car, the people always drop
the rocks on their feet.'"

"'These are unexplainable things,' Murray said, 'You can say
what you please about Pele, but let me tell you, when these
things are happening, you are willing to be on your knees, in
front of anyone or anything. You feel like, 'Get that stuff away
from me!' Since I sent the sand back, I've started getting a
better life.'" (See the Los Angeles Times for for May 8, 2001.
Many thanks to Steve Wilson for this newspaper article.(Editor's
Comment: The big mystery here is how Murray's name got into the
central FBI computer system. Perhaps Pele cast a spell on the
FBI. This may also explain how the Bureau was able to misplace
3,135 documents related to the Oklahoma City bombing case.)

THE LION SLEEPS TONIGHT...WELL, NOT EXACTLY

One of the strangest poltergeist cases of recent years is now
taking place in southern Spain.

A blue-and-yellow wooden lion, located in a soon-to-be-opened
children's park in Tomares, near Sevilla, which children use as
a rocking-horse, continues to rock long after the youthful rider
has dismounted.

The "haunted" lion stands in a playground of the Plaza
Diamantino in Tomares. It is said to begin rocking at nightfall
and to keep rocking for 50 minutes to an hour at any one time.

Some residents theorize that the lion is reacting to "the
slipstream of cars passing on a motorway nearby" or "vibration
from very heavy trucks."

Others claim that "the lion is being ridden by the souls of
Spanish Republicans," Marxist and anarchist supporters of
Spain's leftwing government, "who were shot by the fascist
forces," the Nationalists under General Francisco Franco in the
Spanish Civil War (1936 to 1939.)

"Parents complained that their children are sneaking into the
play area at night to ride the lion."

"A spokesman for the Tomares municipal government denied reports
that arrangements had been made to exorcise the lion." (See
Ananova for May 9, 2001. Many thanks to Louise A. Lowry for this
report.)

MYSTERIOUS FUNGUS ENDANGERS KENTUCKY'S THOROUGHBREDS

"The Kentucky thoroughbred (horse) breeding crisis, caused by
broodmares either aborting their foals or delivering them
stillborn, could produce sky-high prices at major yearling
auctions and shrink fields at racetracks across the nation a few
years down the road."

"Scientists and veterinarians believe mycotoxins that produce
fungus in pastures" in northern Kentucky "are responsible for
the ravaging of the food crops at the world's foremost breeding
grounds in the bluegrass region of Kentucky."

"'It looks to be either a fungus or a clover that's producing
the mycotoxins,' Connie Ingle said from Meadowdale Farm in
Vourbon County 'We had drought conditions followed by a hard
winter. Then it got very hot, and after that we had a couple of
frosts that apparently drove the toxicity into the leaves.'"

"The crisis is mainly confined to the Kentucky drought area a
handful of cases reported in neighboring Ohio. Neither the
Illinois Thoroughbred Breeders and Owners Foundation nor the
University of Illinois School of Veterinary Medicine has
received reports of cases in Illinois."

"Nonetheless, the crisis is affecting the Illinois breeding
program because many of the state's breeders, such as Ingle,
send their mares to stallions in Kentucky and then bring them
back to foal in compliance with Illinois registered
requirements."

"'About 96 percent of the mares on our farms go to Kentucky to
be bred,' said Joe Carper, manager of Arlington Park." (See the
Chicago Tribune for May 12, 2001, "Bluegrass turns deadly for
racehorse breeders," page 1.e)


 From the UFO Files...

1981: "MISSING TIME" IN EASTERN MEXICO

Twenty years ago, Jose Escobar was in Germany. Returning home to
Mexico in June 1981, he decided to visit his family, who lived
in the eastern state of Tamulipas.

One evening, Jose decided to visit his grandfather. He asked his
cousin Abel, who owned a Ford pickup truck, to give him a ride
out there.

His grandfather's farm was near a small lake or man-made
reservoir a few kilometers from Los Lopez, which is 16
kilometers (10 miles) from the small city of Miguel Aleman in
Tamulipas. With another cousin, Pablo, they made the trip out to
their grandfather's farm.

The evening passed more quickly than anyone suspected. It was
1:30 a.m. when they said goodbye to the old man, climbed into
the truck and headed down the dirt road back to Los Lopez.

"There were just the three of us," Jose reported. "It was 2 a.m.
One of my cousins was asleep in the front seat. My cousin Abel
and myself were talking about old times."

The Ford went rumbling down the road between cornfields. Jose
and Abel were looking out the windshield, facing northwest, when
an unearthly blue light enveloped the pickup truck.

"From out of nowhere these three bright bluish lights appeared
right in front of us. I would say they were 25 meters away There
were three bluish lights close to white. They were about three
meters (10 feet) above the field."

With an elbow, Abel nudged his sleeping cousin. "Wake up! You're
missing it!"

Jose reported, "We looked at each other, asking, 'D you see
this!?' Then there was a white flash, which kind of faded away.
But not much."

 From that point on, Jose remembers nothing.

Oh, he knows he got home all right. He just doesn't remember the
drive home. Or saying goodbye to Abel and Pablo. Or undressing
for bed. He has no memory of what happened to him after the
light flash.

The next day, Jose sought out his cousins, and "we talked about
the incident and how we couldn't remember anything else after
that moment."

Twenty years later, the question still haunts Jose Escobar.
"Could I have experienced 'missing time'?" (Email Form Report)


That's it for this week. Join us next time for more UFO and
paranormal news from around the planet Earth, brought to you by
"the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup. See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2001 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 fist appeared.

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
or use the Sighting Report Form at:

http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences,
UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of
Filer's Files and Oz 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:43:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:47:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Sparks


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:40:01 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >>From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:11:55 +0100
 >>Subject: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >>I was just browsing the NICAP website, and came upon the
 >>following "flying saucer" illustration taken from a US Air Force
 >>Manual (AFM 200-3, Chapter 9, Page 3) see:

 >>http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/manual.htm

 >>There does not seem to be a date referenced on the website as to
 >>when this manual was first published. I'm sure some list members
 >>will be familiar with this illustration, though - so has anyone
 >>got more information on it?

 >Sorry I cannot provide any further info on the source
 >of the picture. Chances are it was a drawing thrown
 >together to illustrate a point, rather than any careful
 >representation of a real object.

 >I seem to sense a bit of tongue-in-cheek on the part of
 >the writers of the AFM 200-3 manual. Classic UFOs as
 >a "technological surprise". Little bits of dry humor
 >may pop up even in an American military manual. Lets
 >not forget the bathing beauties 'mistakenly' slipped
 >into an otherwise dry military slide-presentation. It
 >kicks up some adrenaline to keep the troops from nodding
 >off, and the same might apply to an otherwise dull
 >technical manual.


Somewhere I read that AF Manual 200-3 with its saucer
illustration is from 1954 and is loosely based on the AVRO
saucer project designs.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                          Secrecy News -- 05/17/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:00:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:49:22 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/17/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 17, 2001

**INDICTMENT OF ROBERT P. HANSSEN
**STILLMAN MEMOIR SUPRRESSED
**PRE-DELEGATION OF NUCLEAR LAUNCH AUTHORITY
**FAS IS MOVING


INDICTMENT OF ROBERT P. HANSSEN

Former FBI Special Agent Robert P. Hanssen was indicted May 16
on 21 counts of espionage, attempted espionage, and conspiracy
to commit espionage.

The text of the indictment is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/hanssen_indict.html


STILLMAN MEMOIR SUPPRESSED

The U.S. government is blocking the publication of a 500 page
manuscript by U.S. nuclear scientist Danny B. Stillman that
describes China's secret nuclear weapon facilities, the
Washington Post reported on May 16.

Stillman, who visited nearly all of the Chinese nuclear
facilities during nine trips over the course of a decade,
submitted a memoir of his experiences for prepublication review
17 months ago, as required by a nondisclosure agreement that he
signed.  But government reviewers have so far denied his request
to publish.

The memoir promises to cast doubt on some of the more extreme
claims of Chinese nuclear espionage that have been made in the
last two years.  Stillman told the Post he believes that the
Chinese nuclear program made its important advances without
resorting to espionage.

See "The Man Inside China's Bomb Labs" by Steve Coll in the May
16 Washington Post here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29474-2001May15.h
tml

Rep. Curt Weldon, a member of the congressional Cox Committee
that critics said exaggerated the threat of Chinese espionage,
responded to the Post story by attacking the Clinton
Administration.  He suggested that the Administration was to
blame for advances in Chinese nuclear weapons because it eased
restrictions on exports of U.S. supercomputers in 1996.

Rep. Weldon also complained that the Cox Committee, which issued
its report in 1999, had not been informed about Stillman's work.
He called on Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to "provide to me
Stillman's trip reports, notes,  photographs, videos, the list
of Chinese scientists and a  draft of his book. Along with a
list of all DOE employees who have visited Chinese nuclear
weapons facilities."

See Rep. Weldon's May 16 floor statement on this and other
subjects here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/h051601.html


PRE-DELEGATION OF NUCLEAR LAUNCH AUTHORITY

In a notable breakthrough in declassification policy, the
Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel declassified
Eisenhower Administration records on the pre-delegation of
nuclear weapon launch authority to military commanders under
certain emergency conditions.

The Panel declassified several documents on this highly
sensitive topic last month in response to an appeal by National
Security Archive senior analyst William Burr, director of the
Archive's nuclear documentation project.

Further information and copies of the declassified documents are
to be published on the National Security Archive web site:

http://www.nsarchive.org


FAS IS MOVING

The Federation of American Scientists is moving from its Capitol
Hill home of 30 years to new offices in downtown Washington, DC.
Effective May 26, the new FAS coordinates will be:

Federation of American Scientists
Suite 209
1717 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036

tel: (202)546-3300
fax: (202)675-1010
www.fas.org

******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org>
with this command in the body of the message: subscribe
secrecy_news [your email address]

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email:  saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:13:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:51:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:53:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 ><snip>

 >>Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
 >>_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
 >>is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
 >>In other words you could have a code word security clearance
 >>with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
 >>Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
 >>classification level.

 >>The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >>system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >>have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >>access to AF UFO files.

 >If true, this would be very good evidence that MJ-12 is not what
 >you believe it to be.

 >If the puppet master can't control the puppet, what is he the
 >master of?


Menzel gained access to Project Blue Book files from another
scientist at Harvard, and used the files to write his first
book.  He was not authorized to have these files.  Ruppelt
wanted Menzel disciplined, however, the ATIC Commander, Colonel
Dunn nixed the idea.  Ruppelt also complained that Menzel
returned the material out of order and scrambled.

[It would seem to me if Menzel were the big MJ-12 guru, that he
could get the cases through other channels and this subterfuge
would not have been necessary.  In January 1952, the Air Force
routinely starting send copies of UFO reports to a number of
other government agencies.  Opps, MJ-12 isn't listed on the DF.
Maybe they didn't have "a need to know."]

Seems sort of silly that Project Blue Book would loan their file
copies to a consultant, but this was the days before cheap
effecient copiers.  The effort to reconstruct the files by
Ruppelt after Menzel returned them held up Battelle's analysis
of Blue Book's cases.

During this era, clerk typists many times typed up copies of
documents which were then certified to be true copies.

Menzel later would be given access to most everything at Project
Blue Book, while others were denied such sweeping access.

As Al Chop revealed in his Sign Historical Group oral history
interview, the Air Force policy was if asked about a certain
case, the Air Force would release the details.  Chop said that
Keyhoe had a good network feeding him leads and  he also had
access to newspaper clippings and was able to ask about many
cases which the Air Force released to him in 1952.  Keyhoe was
very persistant and would not go away or could not be discourage
with a simple, "no."  Chop said when he came to work, he would
find Keyhoe already there with more questions for him.

An important point was:  one still had to know about a case to
get the details.

Later, the policy was not so open which led to charges of cover
up.

In the mid-1950s Hynek started  meeting with Civilian Saucer
Intelligence of New York (CSI-NY).  Hynek would sometimes give
CSI summaries of interesting Air Force cases.

During the time that Colonel Carl Hart was PIO officer, Ted
Bloecher wrote to Hart about these cases Hynek slipped to CSI.
Hart confirmed the cases and the Air Forces evaluations.

Interestingly enough, Father Gill's report on UFO activity in
New Guinea in 1959 was passed from the RAAF to the USAF attache.
The USAF attache reported that the Australian had received an
inquiry from Keyhoe which they had answered by suggesting that
Keyhoe should contact Father Gill or others.

Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.project1947.com/
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
(860) 546-9135








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 17

              Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:34:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:00:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate! - Aldrich


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:20:57 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:08:35 -0000
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Get Off Your Greer And Investigate!

 ><snip>

 >>Confusing is it? Then either learn to trust those of us who have
 >>the knowledge and experience, or spend less time opinionizing on
 >>this site and more time investigating for yourself. If you have
 >>access to the internet, you have access to rich sources of
 >>information.

 ><snip>

 >>And for Bobbie, as G.T. said, you just don't get
 >>counter-attention without having legitimate news, except by
 >>sensationalism. It is much easier said than done to hold such a
 >>conference, and somebody put up a lot of money (which we don't
 >>have) to pay for this one. It also takes a lot of time and
 >>energy, and almost all of us have to work for a living.

 >Dick, List:

 >Ever hear of the Fund For UFO Research?

 >Here is an excerpt about them:

 >"FUND FOR UFO RESEARCH
 >P.O. Box 277
 >Mt. Rainier, MD 20712
 >Tel: (703) 684-6032
 >http://www.fufor.com/

 >This non-profit corporation was established in 1979 to raise
 >money to support scientific and educational projects submitted
 >by qualified researchers. It is composed solely of a 15 member
 >Board, most of the members being Ph.D.'s in various scientific
 >fields. In its 16 years, it has raised more than $500,000, which
 >has been used to fund investigations in the physical and social
 >sciences, to support scientific conferences, and to encourage
 >the serious treatment of UFOs by the press."

 >Why don't you put in an application for a grant to publicize the
 >real stuff, and tell the truth about the Greer fiasco in order to
 >enecourage the serious treatment of UFOs by the press?

Bob,

Are you funning us or don't you know that Dick Hall was the
Chairman of FUFOR?!?


Jan Aldrich










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 23:58:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:04:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:01:03 +1200

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:15:35 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:03:46 +1200

 >Hi Robert, List

 >><snip>

 >>William wrote:

 >>>Corso was a patriot and couldn't stand by and let the US be made
 >>>a fool of so he contacted Paul Scott a political columnist of
 >>>some note and divulged "all" to him. This too me was a very
 >>>crafty way of forcing the Presidents hand by making the info
 >>>public whilst still remaining in the background as an
 >>>unknown...where all good intelligence ppl should be.

 >>>Scott, or others he told released the story to the public
 >>>forcing the President to confront the Russians. The rest is
 >>>history.

 >>What most people are "ignorant" of is that their was storys and
 >>tales being told about so called missiles and other in cuba for
 >>at least a year previous to the crisis. Folks coming out of the
 >>country to the US were telling storys about missiles and such.
 >>This was leaking out to the media in August of '62. I also
 >>recall seeing a CIA estimate dated in August of 62 which spoke
 >>of the anti aircraft type missiles being put in Cuba, or Cuber
 >>as JFK referred to the country.

 >>JFK's own CIA director warned about the Soviets introducing
 >>military equipment including missiles into Cuba in the many
 >>months preceeding the crisis.

 >>The point being that tales and storys about Russian military
 >>equipment including missiles being introduced into Cuba were
 >>either being discussed by administration officials and or
 >>leaking into the media long before Corso ever showed up. Also
 >>keep in mind that nobody cared as long as the weapons were not
 >>considered "offensive" in nature.

 >We don't know that this was long before Corso showed up. This
 >happened in October '62. You'd have to pretty short sighted to
 >think Corso hadn't been following these August '62 media leaks
 >and discussions. He even says ..."as the summer of '62 came to
 >an end, ominous reports were circulating all through Washington
 >concerning Soviet freighters making their way into Cuban
 >waters. The traffic was intense, but there was no response from
 >our intelligence people on what was happening" Noone has said
 >that it wasn't known, just that it had a "lid clamped down on
 >it"

Bill,

Regardless of what Corso claimed or said, the fact of the matter
was that storys about Russian putting everything from troops to
missiles in cuba were floating around before 1962. In fact some
of they started leaking out of the Cuban exile community after
the Bay of Pigs Fiasco in 61'.

 >In fact if these leaks and discussions were taking place, _all_
 >the more reason for Corso to act. It seemed to him everyone was
 >ignoring it

 >Whether there were stories being circulated or not regarding
 >anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba doesn't really make much
 >difference. The point being that it seemed to Corso the same lid
 >was clamped down on the nukes when the cannisters were
 >discovered, in essence forcing his hand.

Corso wasn't in the "loop" when the pictures came back
showing the missile cannisters

 >>It wasn't until a U-2 photo recce plane brought back photo
 >>evidence (actual proof if you will) of cannisters on the ground
 >>in cuba, and the photo interpretation team identified them as
 >>missile containers and informed JFK. The photos are what
 >>"forced" JFK to deal with Cuba.

 >Isn't this what Corso said tipped the balance for him?
 >He was seeing the the US (on the basis of the cannisters)
 >at the very least being embarrassed and the most, in absolute
 >danger of having missile attacks only 15 mins away from
 >Washington. A very precarious situation indeed in his mind

He saw the pictures along with everybody else after the crisis
started.

 >>As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
 >>did not identify Corso by name. Unless someone can find Paul
 >>Scotts papers where he claims to have gotten all the details
 >>from Corso, all we would find out is that Corso was one of many
 >>100s of people telling stories about missiles in Cuba. The bottom
 >>line is JFK did nothing until the photographic proof was in
 >>hand.

 >Yes I agree Robert....it wasn't 'til the "nuke cannister"
 >photographs turned up that JFK did something Where Corso comes
 >in up is when he tried to find out if anything was being done

The problem was that no "nukes" were actually on the Island
until after the crisis began. Only IRBMs. The warheads came
later.

 >about the "nukes". The CIA was being "mum" and was going to
 >downplay like they were doing with the anti-aircraft missiles
 >because the Kennedy admin didn't want a Soviet

The CIA was frothing about the issue in August of 1962 and much
earlier.

Missiles (anti aircraft at that point) were a big deal to
director CIA McCone. The administration choose to do nothing
*until* we had proof of "offensive" weapons being introduced
into cuba.

Here is the bottom line on Corso and his book. Corso himself
claimed that Birnes stroked the book and material was not
true/correct. Corso's own son has apprently claimed that about
10 percent of the book is "worthwhile" apparently meaning
correct. Obviously the son doesn't believe every word in the
book, nor does he consider it UFO scripture never to be doubted
or questioned.

So in essence we have a book that (being generous) anywhere up
to 70-90 percent of the book is a stroke job.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 17

                      Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:23:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:07:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch


 >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:53:06 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Case 10 of the "Twelve Good Unknowns" reported in Project Blue
 >Book Special Report #14 was an "enigma wrapped in a mystery"
 >until I investigated the Blue Book microfilm file at the
 >National Archives and (finally!) found the original data
 >(witness interviews). Now the case is "merely" an enigma.

 >I mentioned it when I saw the George Filer (Filer's Files) had
 >recently posted a sighting from the Rogue River area several
 >weeks ago.

 >What was that pancake-shaped object/craft, anyway?

 >I invite you to see for yourself and try to explain this enigma.

 >Go to:

 >http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue River.html



Hello Bruce:

I got a 404 error from FreeServers when I clicked on the URL
below. Didya leave out some Dubyas or lasagnas or something?

Here's the error message, slightly edited:

"404 Error - File Not Found
  The page or file you are looking for
  http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.
  Possible Reasons:
  You may have spelled the URL incorrectly.
  This site may have been removed due to a
  violation of Freeserver's Lasagna Policy.
  This site may have been moved to a
  different server. "


Sorry

- 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                      Re: Just Think Of It - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 00:51:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:10:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Just Think Of It - Mortellaro


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:03:15 -0700
 >From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Just Think Of It


 >First off I am not posting to defend mr Greer and no, I don’t
 >have all the answers But it seems to me that that the reality is
 >that Greer:

 >1. Brought major media attention to a most often taboo subject
 >2. Received international attention
 >3. Was able to get genuine individuals to make valid
 >   contributions

 >However, we all agree it was tainted and soiled by all the wacko
 >contributions as well.

 >But, right or wrong, he did DO SOMETHING! Now we can all send
 >each other email until the ISPs fold, yet its still just email.

 >I don't see CNN covering this list, but they did cover ole Steve

 >So, one must ask, at least I must.

 >How did he do it and can it be repeated?

 >Just think of it, if the good things that were accomplished were
 >done by a credible group with only credible people, would that
 >not make for a more credible press conference and debate?

 >So then, what did Greer do right and how can it be re-done
 >again, with only the credible?

 >Right or wrong, Greer got off his a.. and did something. Maybe
 >we should see that facet of this as well?

 >Criticism & complaints accepted

 >Dan ;o)

The man speaketh truth. What I been trying to say and got me
nuttin but offlist mail (twenty-seven emails telling me how much
they all agreed - all UpDates Lurking Listers, unfortunately).

Dan ;o) Good words. You must also be a fine judge of women and
good likker. Which is why you've ignored all my requests to
enjoy Gripple. Free even.

Alas, you are forgaved... forgiven... whatever.


Jim Mortellaro

PS: To UpDates Listers. Thank you all for your contributions to
the "funny" stories about UFO's and other assorted terrible
things about researchers. All those submissions... all one of
them. Guess I shall recommend me as the winner. I could use the
fresh Gripple more than you people. Better than mood altering
sgurd (I'm dyslexic).









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:34:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:16:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:00:19 EDT
 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 >><snip>

 >>Dennis wrote:

 >>>More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >>>Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >>>denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >>>Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >>>would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >>>- that should be your job.)

 >>>Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >>>leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >>>with yours?

 >>Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
 >>_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
 >>is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
 >>In other words you could have a code word security clearance
 >>with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
 >>Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
 >>classification level.

 >>The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >>system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >>have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >>access to AF UFO files.

 >I must step in here and side with Dennis on this issue.

 >The Blue Book files did not have codeword access controls. More
 >importantly, according to the (fraudulent) MJ-12 Eisenhower
 >Briefing Document, Blue Book had liaison with the MJ-12
 >Committee and Menzel is named as a member.

Hi Brad,

To our knowledge there was no codeword access controls on
Bluebook. If such a liason existed, the person doing the liason
would have to hold a clearance compatabile with that group
(MJ-12) or organization. Just because they had such a clearance
and or sat in on meetings doesn't mean that they could wholesale
transfer files and documents that were properly AF classified to
an outside group or organization.

The point being is just because Bluebook was a very public
program does not preclude the possibility that a highly
classified program was also doing UFO work and working along
with and or using Bluebook.

I would point out (just about the time the wolves are howling)
that I am not saying that MJ-12 is real or that the EBD is real.

Many years ago when the CIA first started the photo recce sat
program. The very public side, for public consumption allegedly
involved shooting monkeys and what not into space. The very
public side was called "Discovery" and had a full compliment of
scientists and engineers who ran the program, did their thing
and so on.

The classified side was called "Corona" and the classification
was Keyhole. The classified side was worked by various
scientists and engineers doing their project on the black side
of the program.

Interestingly the _only_ person on the public side of the
program that knew the actual purpose and was cleared to the
highly classified side was not the Discovery program director or
his sub managers but a secretary who worked in the office.
Everybody else from the director of the public side down was not
told or informed. In essence the secretary was the "liason"
between the two programs.

 >Therefore, with liaison between Blue Book and MJ-12 there is no
 >possibility whatsoever that an MJ-12 member - if MJ-12 really
 >existed as claimed in the (fraudulent) EBD - could not gain
 >access to BB documents which were not compartmented or
 >access-controlled.

Just because a person (such as Menzel) holds a code word
clearance with the National Security Agency doesn't entitle him
to look at AF or DOD classified documents even though they may
be part of the same program. _If_ Menzel was a member of MJ-12
besides his MJ-12 clearance he would also need to have Air Force
Secret and Top Secret clearances plus the need to know to see
Bluebook files. Bottom line is just because you are a member of
MJ-12 would not instantly entitle you to access to AF files,
likewise if you had an AF S or TS clearance would not instantly
entitle you to a S or TS document generated by MJ-12.

 >The fact that Menzel had to use subterfuge to get copies of BB
 >files for his Flying saucers book because Ruppelt blocked his
 >access is proof that Menzel was not a member of the MJ-12
 >described in the EBD.

All it is proof of is that Menzel was not properly cleared
through AF security channels and lacked a need to know or see
Bluebook files. There are many people in government who hold
security clearances who work for one organization and are not
allowed to see/view files generated by another
group/organization even though they may be working on the same
project.

I also have no doubt that if Menzel had requested copies of
files through the liason channel he would have had to justify
the request through our theoritical MJ-12 channels. Imagine this
request: "Gee fellas, could you use the official liason channel
and get me copies of files so I can use them for my book I am
writing....."


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                        Re: Talk And Action - Chalker

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:41:01 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:30:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Chalker


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

<snip>

 >Now for my proposal. If everyone on this List who sincerely
 >wants to see Congressional hearings and other serious efforts to
 >bring out the truth were to do the following, it could have a
 >major impact. Purchase a copy of The UFO Evidence, Volume II if
 >you can afford it (via MUFON, Amazon.com, or the Scarecrow Press
 >web site) and send it to your Congressman or Senator with a
 >cover letter urging him or her to support UFO hearings.

 >Lest you think this is self-serving, three-fourths of the
 >royalties go to the member groups of the UFO Research Coalition,
 >so you would be doing two worthwhile things at once: getting the
 >report to those who should see it and supporting serious UFO
 >research. (And if you either appreciate my work or would like to
 >see me out of the picture, the remaining one-fourth goes to my
 >retirement fund.)

 >Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >and pseudoscience.

 >Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

 >And if you really can't even afford the most inexpensive of
 >these books, then send your Congressman or Senator a letter
 >citing these three books and urging them to read them and to
 >support Congressional hearings.

 >Might be interesting.


Dick and the List,

This is an excellent idea. In fact such targetting should be
generalised to any appropriate forum or organisation, be it
political, scientific etc. Peter Sturrock's excellent book "The
UFO Enigma" should also be included.

Any seriously inclined individual who wants to promote the case
for serious attention to the UFO subject should arm themselves
with this sort of brief primer list so that any queries or
criticisms etc can be promptly answered with substance, rather
than the "b.s." that inhabits much of the field. If we are
having trouble stemming the uncritical tide, imagine how
difficult or unlikely it is for the uniformed politician or
scientist, etc, to wade through it.

Keep it simple.

Having had the opportunity to read "The UFO Evidence - a Thirty
Year Report" by Richard Hall, I can without reservation state
that it is an outstanding contribution to the core literature on
the UFO phenomenon. It should be required reading for any
aspiring UFO researcher, a necessary and important review for
all experienced researchers and a remarkable primer for any
party seeking an understanding of what the real UFO "beast" is
all about.

Thank you Dick for the remarkable effort in present an
impressive "natural history" of the UFO phenomenon.

Regards,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                        Re: Talk And Action - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:13:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:32:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

Richard wrote:

 >I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
 >you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
 >is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
 >(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
 >out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
 >groups, or supported their publication programs.

 >If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
 >effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
 >I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
 >three groups it comprises:

 >The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
 >for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
 >Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
 >had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
 >responsibly.

Richard,

Regarding your affirmation of what comprises... erm... 'serious'
ufology, it clearly confirms you endorse, 'those SOB aliens that
have been kidnapping us'.

Are you really sure about this?

It seems somewhat distant from the scientific recognition which
supposedly 'serious' ufology laments never being achieved in
over fifty years. Are stories that, 'creatures from another
world selected _me_', now taken seriously by the media instead
of being subjected to understandable ridicule?

How the hell could Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs "outperform
Greer, and do so responsibly"? Presumably only by arranging a
press conference for 'alien abductees'?

And you're declaring this represents the antithesis of Greer?


Claiming that Greer isn't indicative of 'ufology, you also
implore that we should support MUFON as representative of the
'UFO Research Coalition'. Yet, as I recently highlighted:

MUFON - the world's largest 'UFO' organisation - promote Greer's
'Campaign for Disclosure'.

Their forthcoming symposium has also invited:

- Dr Roger Leir on 'alien implants'
- Mack and Hopkins on 'alien abductions'
- Friedman, Robert and Ryan Wood on the reality of 'MJ-12'

and...

Dr Steven Greer.
[END]

You advocate that we "support" the 'UFO Research Coalition' or
"shut up!".

That's some arrogant challenge, are you sure Richard Hall can
back it up?

Not one for being silenced, I have accepted your challenge and
can easily prove, as with typical 'UFO' evidence, that it's
utterly, complete bunk.

Doubtless if you want to 'shut up' Steven Greer, we can expect
to hear how you have imparted that concern to coalition MUFON,
who... incredibly... do not agree.

Coalition MUFON evidently believe that Greer, "brings a unique
combination of scientific knowledge, credibility, vision, humor
and inspiration to his lectures".

They also proclaim that, "Dr. Greer relies on first hand
knowledge of extraterrestrial activity world wide, and has
direct sources for information regarding covert operations
dealing with the subject" - see:

http://www.mufon.com/home.html

Can we also presume that the 'heroic effort' you cite doesn't
actually involve any real heroes at all. I'm sure other
subscribers have been privileged to know true heroes, not some
'me too' wacko who believes they were 'personally' selected by
ETs.

Anyway, thank you for those comments. It's proven everything I
said on 'UFO Skeptics' about 'ufology' and self-delusions from
the 'old school', indeed emphasising those observations.

Meantime, Dr Steven Greer is evidently the coalition darling and
as highlighted on 'UFO Skeptics', his endeavours are also now
the focus of promotions via every popular 'UFO' magazine and
conference.

Especially the 'UFO Research Coalition', which you somehow
perceive as a statement of ufology's scientific accomplishment.

Given that Friedman, Leir, Robert and Ryan Wood will readily
take UFO Research Coalition/MJ-12/abductee/alien implant/devoid
from any reality stage with Greer, that's _exactly_ what it is.


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     EW UFO & ETI News Update - 05-18-01

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:44:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:34:43 -0400
Subject: EW UFO & ETI News Update - 05-18-01


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

The Electric Warrior : News May 18, 2001
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/

------------------------------------------------------------
UFO & ETI

UFO MAGAZINE'S DON ECKER - MY LOOK AT PROJECT DISCLOSURE

At the start, Greer laid out his feelings that all UFOs and ETs
had to be good--no hostility or "evil intent" anywhere visible
in his worldview. I maintained--rather forcefully, in
retrospect--that we just didn't have enough information yet to
make that judgement.

more...

http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0022.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
ufo & eti

PARADIGM CLOCK RESET

 From PRG's Steven Basset...

The Paradigm Clock has been reset to 11:59 pm (one minute to
midnight). Based upon recent developments, the Paradigm Clock
has been moved forward 50 seconds. Midnight on the Paradigm
Clock will mean formal disclosure of the ET presence has taken
place.

more...

http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0021.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
ufo & eti

THE ALLIES OF HUMANITY - A LETTER FROM THE PUBLISHER

Despite the huge body of compelling evidence that is now at last
being made public, what is most troubling to many researchers is
that almost nothing is known about the identity, origins,
motivations, ethics, and intentions of the extraterrestrials
themselves.

more...

http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0020.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE GALLERY

UFOs OVER WASHINGTON DC
http://www.electricwarrior.com/expose/ewUfoWashingtonDCThumb.jpg

Electronic Media

This image recalls the UFO flap over Washington DC in July
of 1952. The week-long series of sighting was corroborated
by both radar and ground-based observations.

Following national attention by the press, the Air Force's
official explanation was that hot air had caused temperature
inversions resulting in unidentified radar targets.

This image is based on a photograph from the National
Archives, taken on the occasion of Eisenhower's inauguration
to the Presidency.

------------------------------------------------------------
THE ELECTRIC WARRIOR
May 18, 2001
Silicon Valley, CA
http://www.electricwarrior.com

------------------------------------------------------------
Web developers, the URL address for this content is:
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0022.htm
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0021.htm
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0020.htm

Permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
article or any portion thereof, provided The Electric
Warrior is cited as the source.

Images are created exclusively for the Electric Warrior
Website. They can be downloaded and cached for individual
use, but may not be reproduced or used in any other context
without permission.

eWarrior@electricwarrior.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

              Cydonian Imperative: 05-18-01 - Another Triangle

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:06:33 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:36:17 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 05-18-01 - Another Triangle

The Cydonian Imperative
5-18-01

Triangular "Perforation" Next to Cydonia Octagon
by Mac Tonnies

Related links:

http://www.marsevidencerevealed.com

http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/images/M14/M1401045.html


[image]

Equilateral triangle next to the octagonal feature in
Cydonia.

[image]

Stereoscopic view of apparent "Octagon" and
"Triangle."

Chris Joseph immediately noticed a distinct triangular feature
next to the "Cydonia Octagon" discovered by Trish Anderson. The
triangular feature appears to be a shallow perforation and shows
no signs of being the remains of an impact crater. Its small
size is inconsistent with other geological explanations, such as
faulting. Careful examination of the image strip shows that the
Octagon and Triangle are the only such geometric features in
this portion of the Cydonia landscape. Their highly unusual
symmetry, structure and proximity argue in favor of a
non-natural origin.

-end-








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                       Re: Talk And Action - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 06:13:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:41:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Lehmberg


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
 >you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
 >is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
 >(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
 >out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
 >groups, or supported their publication programs.

 >If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
 >effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
 >I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
 >three groups it comprises:

 >The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
 >for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
 >Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
 >had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
 >responsibly.

 >Now for my proposal. If everyone on this List who sincerely
 >wants to see Congressional hearings and other serious efforts to
 >bring out the truth were to do the following, it could have a
 >major impact. Purchase a copy of The UFO Evidence, Volume II if
 >you can afford it (via MUFON, Amazon.com, or the Scarecrow Press
 >web site) and send it to your Congressman or Senator with a
 >cover letter urging him or her to support UFO hearings.

 >Lest you think this is self-serving, three-fourths of the
 >royalties go to the member groups of the UFO Research Coalition,
 >so you would be doing two worthwhile things at once: getting the
 >report to those who should see it and supporting serious UFO
 >research. (And if you either appreciate my work or would like to
 >see me out of the picture, the remaining one-fourth goes to my
 >retirement fund.)

 >Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >and pseudoscience.

 >Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

 >And if you really can't even afford the most inexpensive of
 >these books, then send your Congressman or Senator a letter
 >citing these three books and urging them to read them and to
 >support Congressional hearings.

 >Might be interesting.


What a completely efficacious idea! I heartily endorse the
concept of sending quality UFO books to our 'leaders'! Letters
and E-mail are too ephemeral even ganged up; a book (a thousand
books!) has 'heft' and is not easy to ignore... but why not send
ALL the books to ONE man (like george jr.), to make the effort
more news worthy and even _harder_ to ignore! I would gleefully
support a focused thrust in this direction as it works so well
on so many levels. Quality material gets to a 'quality' person
in an attention getting publishable sort of way, honorable
remuneration is extended to the people who have done the bravest
most quality work on the subject, and we are finally born into
the 21st Century Worldwide Renaissance. It's a win, win... win
situation. This is forgetting for a moment the happy serendipity
of contributing to Mr. Hall's retirement fund (icing on a
nutritious cake! <g>).

All the ufological principles could submit a list of, say... the
top ten works based on scholarship and readability plus where
the book can be found. The List-lurker could peruse those lists,
find the title that "salutes the flag" for that individual, and
(with some sense of urgency and timeliness) send for not one but
_two_ books (!)... one for their own edification and
enlightenment, and one to send on to "DUBYA" with greetings and
felicitations!

Given a proactive interest, I'm going to do that with Jerry
Clark's Encyclopedia, because it's sure to make a quality list,
and I have just been putting off getting the damn thing. If you
want to support this and think you can provide a quality list
(and let's see women on that list!) send that puppy in with the
aforementioned sense of urgency and timeliness.

Errol might mention it on his radio show, I would write an
impassioned plea for submission to the Rense site... this is the
kind of completely positive thing that, done soon, could strike
iron while it was hot!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

 >
~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:45:20 -0400
Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto


I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
UFOs.

Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
green men.


Great job Nick!

Kelly









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

              Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 08:13:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:51:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:05:41 +0100

 >There are a number of underlying issues concerning the recent
 >'Disclosure Project'.

 >The point which shouldn't be overlooked and the most significant
 >one, is that Dr Steven Greer _does_ represent mainstream
 >ufology. On behalf of it, he presented a substantial amount of
 >data and testimony which was claimed to justify the 'disclosure'
 >initiative.


<snip>

Reading UFO UpDates is not only interesting it is educational. I
enjoy many of the exchanges and information.

There are also elements which test you. One just has to un-learn
many things one learned in school.

For example:

1. "Guilt by association" is not a logical fallacy. Thanks,
James, I had always had the opposite impression.

2. Another interesting logical discover is that if two items
have one thing in common then the two items are equal. An
example of this logical argument maybe found in:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/jan/m26-010.shtml

Here we find this:

[Start quote]

Incidentally, concerning Zamora's "two seconds" observation of
two "small adults", who were "normal in shape" and wearing
"white coveralls", if I recall correctly, it was pointed out
during UFORL discussion that 'spy' missions and training
favoured low- weight, 'jockey' balloonists.

A 1965 photograph of two 'pilots' in white coveralls, heading
for their aerial vehicle, can be seen on my web site, at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/balloon2.jpg

[End quote]


If one looks at the picture, one might conclude that these men
are clad in shirts and pants, but some of these are indeed
white. So by this logic, white bras and panties are also
coveralls.

Please note another good example of this factor is Venus fades
in the morning, Spaur's UFO disappeared in the morning,
therefore Spaur's UFO was Venus. QED.

Pesky details like the officers were outside their vehicle and
observed the UFO moving and casting a shadow on the ground,
should probably be ignored. Also, the fact that the officers
identified the moon, Venus and the UFO all at the same time
should also be ignored. That other officers observed the UFO go
by followed by Spaur should also be ignored. Why?  Because one
data point in the report matches another data point in the
explanation. That is all that is required.

3. Lack murder, the greatest sin in the world is
"self-referencing."

4. "Over-referencing" is also a sin of major proportions.

5. Labels trump logic and facts. Calling people "UFO elite,"
"debunkers," "believers," relieves the disputant of the burden
of using evidence and developing arguments in a logical way.

6. "Ad hominem" is no longer a logical fallacy. Sort of goes
together with 5.

7.  Mantras are superiors to arguments. "Playing to the
Ufological choir." "Breezes created by all the head wagging in
assent." Again these trump any argument.

8. Rhetorical tricks and obfuscation, trump facts and logic.
Especially useful in MJ-12 debates or in Klassic arguments.

9. Bashing the witnesses is preferable to research. With
Klassma, the witnesses were reliably and carefully reporting
what they saw, they just didn't know they had seen plasma or
corona discharge leaving power lines and floating around the
country side. With the exit of Klassma from the scene, the
witnesses became, stupid, unreliable and completely
untrustworthy. Of course, if that is the case, then, all the
explained sightings are suspect, also.

Also:

  Since some witnesses are unreliable, all witnesses are. Since
  some reports are IFOs, all reports are IFOs. Hey, this last
  worked for Humphreys with ball lighting.

9. Piling higher and deeper is a great way to wear down the
opposition. I am kind of fond of this one myself as it worked
several times during my Army career. Just produce a large
report, slap a summary on there which may not necessarily
represent the contents, and no one will ever take the time to
plow through the mishagosh in the text. Good example is the
Condon report. We can get people to produce hundreds of line of
irrelevant material here, too, in E-mails.

10. Failure to close with an argument or answer salient points
is a virtue and not a defect. In the computer age these actions
are facilitated by cutting out important points and answering
only minor matters. E-mail replies are wonderful for this.

11. Misuse of data, or having unusual beliefs taints the
objective value of testimony or phenomena. Huxley would have
loved this one. Since people harbor unusual beliefs about UFOs,
the study of the phenomenon is worthless. A good example of this
would be that mathematics should be disregarded because numbers
are used by numerologists thereby tainting anything done with
mathematics.

Some on this List and elsewhere generally subscribe to the idea
that mathematics is indeed tainted, as any attempt at
mathematical reasoning is completely ignored and the argument
defaults back to #2.

12. Secondary source material is okay, even when primary
material is readily available, Ziegler and Robinson have made
this high art. "UFOs and the National Security State" is the
absolute pinnacle of this idea!  I especially like the part
where Tim Good's mistake on the date of the Prof. C. B. Moore's
sighting means that the sighting and other incident around this
time are given in 1948 and then all over again in 1949. Such
great research!

13. Having an ideas is better than proving it by research. Again
Robinson is my source on this one. Determination of wind
direction and speed might get in the way of the Socorro balloon
theory. Best leave that undone.

14. The main problem with ufology is bunk and bunk generators.
Noise is much higher than the signal and the bunk is generated
at a much greater rate than good information. Bunk generators
exist in all parts of the spectrum. "Skeptics" and "believers"
both have mythology and legends. The importance of item in a
skeptic-believer debate is usually inversely proportional to
the amount posts on the subject.

14. The validity of an argument may be overcome by digging up an
example of extreme belief and accusing the opponent of
association with such. Hmm. this is sort of like number #1.
Maybe it is time to get off this merry-go-around. Which leads
to:

15. Circular reasoning is a virtue. There are no reliable UFO
witnesses because reliable people would not report UFOs.

Jan Aldrich









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                        Re: Ravenna 1966 - van Gemert

From: Jean van Gemert <j.vangemert@chello.nl>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:43:27 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:53:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - van Gemert


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:08:59 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

 >Yes, because Venus was at that very moment a bright point of
 >light in the Eastern sky in the direction that the two hour chase
 >occurred. And the object disappeared with dawn. Also, the
 >witnesses didn't report another bright light, Venus, in the same
 >direction.

<snip>

 >It is, if one doesn't automatically jump to the conclusion,
 >first, that a flying saucer must have been involved just because
 >a witness described the visual appearance of Venus as a "disk".

Bob,

I've now read a number of your posts on the Ravenna case, and
the illogic and lack of insight into this case you've put on
display so far is hard to measure, as it's off the scale. All I
see from you is uncontrolled arm-waiving and blanket dismissals.

You claim the officers didn't report "Venus, another bright
light, in the same direction". Obviously you never bothered to
read any of the case materials, Bob, a trait which seems so
typical of you.

Spaur in his conversation with Quintanilla notes that he saw a
bright spot in the sky that was "real bright", asside from
seeing the UFO, which Hynek then identifies as being Venus. [1]
In short, Spaur did see Venus in _addition_ to the UFO.

There are many other parts of the observations which makes it
impossible to pigeon-hole the case into your neat little Venus
hypothesis.

Did you even bother to read the transcripts, Bob? Obviously not.

The UFO was never described as just a 'bright [pinpoint] light'.
Here's a snippet from Spaur's own words:

"It's about fifty feet across, and I can just make out a dome or
something on the top, but that's very dark. The bottom is real
bright; it's putting out a beam of light that makes a big spot
underneath. It's like it's sitting on the beam. It was overhead
a minute ago, and it was as bright as day here: Our headlights
didn't make nearly as much light as it did. And this is no
helicopter or anything like that; it's perfectly still and it
just makes a humming noise." [2]

 From the transcript with Quintanilla it's obvious that during
parts of the chase, the object is at a low altitude and passes
over several other police cars.

Now, would you please explain to List members how Venus can:

- maneuver overhead
- make a humming noise
- put out a beam of light
- make it seem as bright as day
- appear as a large glowing object, fifty feet across

Will we see more of your dismissive waffling, or will you try
and address the facts of the case this time?

1. Hynek, The UFO Experience, p. 137-138
2. Story, Ronald, [ed.] "The Encyclopedia of UFOs," Doubleday, 1980.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                      Re: Talk And Action - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:01:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:56:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Mortellaro


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
 >you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
 >is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
 >(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
 >out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
 >groups, or supported their publication programs.

 >If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
 >effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
 >I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
 >three groups it comprises:

 >The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
 >for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
 >Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
 >had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
 >responsibly.

 >Now for my proposal. If everyone on this List who sincerely
 >wants to see Congressional hearings and other serious efforts to
 >bring out the truth were to do the following, it could have a
 >major impact. Purchase a copy of The UFO Evidence, Volume II if
 >you can afford it (via MUFON, Amazon.com, or the Scarecrow Press
 >web site) and send it to your Congressman or Senator with a
 >cover letter urging him or her to support UFO hearings.

 >Lest you think this is self-serving, three-fourths of the
 >royalties go to the member groups of the UFO Research Coalition,
 >so you would be doing two worthwhile things at once: getting the
 >report to those who should see it and supporting serious UFO
 >research. (And if you either appreciate my work or would like to
 >see me out of the picture, the remaining one-fourth goes to my
 >retirement fund.)

 >Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >and pseudoscience.

 >Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

 >And if you really can't even afford the most inexpensive of
 >these books, then send your Congressman or Senator a letter
 >citing these three books and urging them to read them and to
 >support Congressional hearings.

 >Might be interesting.


Dear Dick, bListers, EBK and the friendly Grelbs who never
contribute,

Not to belittle your request, sir, but I think you are the one
who would be surprised, if not shocked, at the number of us out
here in the void, who contribute to and support those folks you
mentioned and more.

Sending a buck two-fifty is not merely the pervue of those who
would build motels in space. The Grant Masters as I call them.
There are those who quietly but effectively donate time, money
and other resources (and I do not refer to myself necessarily as
I am now a poor farmer in the woods of upper New York State,
shooting innocent animules for his supper and growing Gripple
Grapes for profit).

In my circle of fiends, we support local efforts at establishing
an effective but honest effort at abduction reporting. We make
purchases of the books you mention and send them to our
so-called erected officials (God help us and I use the correct
speeling) and we write articles to our local news services,
newspapers and magazines... most especially the County
Government printings. And often, they are published. These
periodicals do not present the material tongue in cheek. They
are presented seriously. Interesting, eh?

Some of us have presented those whom we respect with large
checks, or hardware, or just plain donation of services. When
these gifts are appreciated, we give more. "We" are the
abductees, the experiencers and the witnesses. We do what we
can. We don't just sit on our asses and make emails for our own
visibility. We appreciate the efforts as well as the sacrifices
of people like Budd, David and others. But we also respect the
people who are at the grass roots. For it is at the grass roots
that the action takes place, where the results are going to bear
fruit. The average, every day Joe is gonna make the difference
eventually.

Another point of view.

Morty








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     Re: OK How About This...? - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:04:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:01:53 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Randle


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:47:16 -0500


 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 15:22:55 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: OK How About This...?


 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:58:03 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: OK How About This....?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:28:53 -0500
 >>>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>>Subject: OK How About This....?


 >Kevin and Bobbie.

 >>>I could go on, but we refuse to police ourselves, so what would
 >>>be the point. We have the evidence about these people and if we
 >>>mention it, then suddenly we become the bad guys out to destroy
 >>>ufology just because we have told the truth. We are called
 >>>jealous because we didn't get invited to participate in Greer's
 >>>circus and when we do post information suggesting problems, we
 >>>are attacked as "big name" ufologists who are jealous.

 >>Again, you are correct. There is no policing of the UFO field,

 >This simply is untrue. Of course there is policing, in the form
 >of internal criticism, of which ufology has a rich, proud
 >history. Every serious ufologist has participated in it at one
 >time or another, including Kevin, Dick, and me, and it looks as
 >if Bobbie is doing the same right now.

Jerry -

I'm thinking here how people who have damaged our work keep
reappearing. No, not those who have made honest mistakes because
we all make those. I'm thinking about the people who invent
tales for us or who have spent time in jail, yet still appear on
programs as if they have something to say that we should be
interested in hearing.

How many times do we have to see the reinvention of the Allende
Letters hoax? How many times do we have to deal with the
nonsense of the Bermuda Triangle? How often to we have to hear
about Billy Meier?

Let's take, as a single example, Don Schmitt. He has done a
great deal of damage to the field, but is still popular because
he says what people want to hear. We hear that he only lied
about his personal history but not about aspects of the
investigation. Yet, from some of his latest statements, we know
that he continues to spin tales. Isn't this a failure of self
policing? We know the truth about him, yet we ignore it.

So, we end up in the same fights today that we had five years
ago, or ten years ago, and are unable to advance. So, while you
are correct that there is a rich history inside Ufology of
public descent and expose, we continue to march in the same
direction, failing to learn the lessons of the past. Those
discredited five years ago reinvent themselves and reappear. And
we make excuses for them because we want to believe what they
say.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                               Jaime Maussan?

From: Royce J. Myers <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:17:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:03:35 -0400
Subject: Jaime Maussan?


Greetings. Does anyone out there know how to get a hold of Jaime
Maussan? I've been trying his e-mail for the last four days, but
his box is over quota.

Appparently, Maussan is doing a program on the Reed Hoax and I
thought he'd like to know what he's getting himself into.

Thanks.


Regards,

Royce J. Myers III
UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                        Re: Ravenna 1966 - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:32:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:05:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Salvaille


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:08:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:25:00 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >It is, if one doesn't automatically jump to the conclusion,
 >first, that a flying saucer must have been involved just because
 >a witness described the visual appearance of Venus as a "disk".

 >Assume that Venus is some sort of object with a shape, squint at
 >it closely, be sure that your eyeglasses are on, and clean, and
 >that your car's windshield is spotless, and then try to figure
 >out what that shape is. Anyone with slight astigmatism will see
 >an oval shape. Anybody else will also see beams of light caused
 >by one's eyelashes, moving back and forth as one moves one's
 >head.

 >Happens all the time. How else would we have all of those Venus
 >IFOs?

<snip>

But instead a blah-blahing your way to intellectual suicide,
would it be possible for you 'honolable' skeptic to answer each
point of Dick Hall's post on Ravenna?

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m07-004.shtml

My two cents you won't.

Ever seen a false skeptic apply the principles of scientific
reasoning?










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     Re: IFO Database Online - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 18 May 2001 08:28:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:46:43 -0400
Subject: Re: IFO Database Online - Hamilton


 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:29:44 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: IFO Database Online

 >I found this website interesting. I'd like to know what others
 >think of the data supplied there. Lots of pics and such.

 >http://ifo.s5.com


Bobbie,

I have had a lot of exchanges with Amy (she was once our Skywatch
Director) and feel she is providing a service with this site so
that comparisons and evaluations can be done.

This does not mean I endorse her conclusions... I will jump to
my own conclusions thank you (sometimes right off the edge of an
upcoming cliff I failed to see!);)


Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                       Re: Talk And Action - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 18 May 2001 08:32:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:55:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hamilton


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
 >you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
 >is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
 >(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
 >out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
 >groups, or supported their publication programs.

 >If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
 >effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
 >I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
 >three groups it comprises:

 >The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
 >for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
 >Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
 >had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
 >responsibly.

 >Now for my proposal. If everyone on this List who sincerely
 >wants to see Congressional hearings and other serious efforts to
 >bring out the truth were to do the following, it could have a
 >major impact. Purchase a copy of The UFO Evidence, Volume II if
 >you can afford it (via MUFON, Amazon.com, or the Scarecrow Press
 >web site) and send it to your Congressman or Senator with a
 >cover letter urging him or her to support UFO hearings.

 >Lest you think this is self-serving, three-fourths of the
 >royalties go to the member groups of the UFO Research Coalition,
 >so you would be doing two worthwhile things at once: getting the
 >report to those who should see it and supporting serious UFO
 >research. (And if you either appreciate my work or would like to
 >see me out of the picture, the remaining one-fourth goes to my
 >retirement fund.)

 >Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >and pseudoscience.

 >Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

Gee Dick, my mouth is usually bigger than my pocketbook, but I
will see what I can do. Of course I would want two copies as I
need one for my library that is squeezing me out of house and
home so I know what these congressman have to read on a dark and
stormy night. I wonder, will they read this book?

 >And if you really can't even afford the most inexpensive of
 >these books, then send your Congressman or Senator a letter
 >citing these three books and urging them to read them and to
 >support Congressional hearings.

This I can do.

Bill H








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                   Average Rate Of UFO Reports Per Minute

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:44:15 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:56:54 -0400
Subject: Average Rate Of UFO Reports Per Minute


Hi everyone.

This morning I made a brief appearance on City-TV's 'Breakfast
Television' show, in Toronto, to talk about UFOs. Since I had
never seen this TV show before and I wanted to have an idea of
what to expect, I watched it from start to finish yesterday.

Ann, one of hosts of this TV show, told her co-host Kevin that
humans around the world are bitten by dogs at a rate of 40 times
per minute! If I assume that the average age for humans in the
world is about 30 years, there should be over 600,000,000 humans
or about 1/10 of the world's population who have been bitten by
dogs (see below for the simple calculation I performed).

   40 dog bites/minute
x 60 minutes/hour
x 24 hours/day
x 365 days/year
x 30 years
-----------------
   630,720,000 dog bites

How does this relate to UFO witnesses? I think most ufologists
will agree that at least 1/10 people have had an unexplained UFO
sighting or some other UFO related experience in their life. If
this is the case, then there should also be over 600,000,000 UFO
witnesses out there. That's an average of 40 single witness UFO
reports per minute!

Even with the many hundreds of thousands of members that China
has in its UFO organizations (many of which are professionals or
have advance degrees), they would be hard pressed just to keep
up-to-date.

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                    Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:00:23 -0400
Subject: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists


Hello to All,

Whilst finishing a piece of writing on ancient Oriental
encounter reports I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion about the
discs allegedly found in 1938. I was very sceptical of the whole
thing until I saw Peter Krassa's photos of them a few years ago,
and now I'm only _sceptical_ (without the 'very'). Then there's
a book called 'Sungods in Exile' which I read so long ago that
all I can remember about it was my own grimace at having wasted
my pocket money on such an obvious bag of drivel. I no longer
have a copy of it, which is a shame as there's evidently some
weird link between all these matters.

What follows is a summary of all I know about the discs. It's
not new information, but if anyone wants to copy it and post it
to the four winds they're welcome to as long as they include my
e-mail address so I can receive some feedback. (I'm aware of a
few places on the internet where this topic is already
discussed, and even a peculiar "We Are The Dzopa, Welcome To Our
Home Page" home page, but I'm sure somebody must be able to add
something more substantial to my search.) At the end of my
summary I've added a postscript about a similar case I learnt
about in 1996.


THE BAIAN-KARA-ULA FINDING

A controversial finding made in 1938 on the Chinese-Tibetan
border adds yet another dimension to the problem of dwarfish
beings in Asia. According to the evidence amassed so far by
researchers of the case, it seems that an expedition to the
region of Baian-Kara-Ula discovered graves in an almost
inaccessible cave in which lay the skeletal remains of strange
thin-boned beings, just a few feet tall, with over-sized
craniums. Next to these were found some 716 mysterious dull-grey
discs. These discs each had a hole in the centre which made them
look like modern LPs. A series of 'runes' extended out from the
holes to the edges of the discs.

Five scientists at the University of Beijing, under the
direction of Professor Tsum Um Nui, set about examining the
discs and the symbols inscribed on them. After a long and
thorough investigation, it was concluded that the symbols
conveyed a message of great importance. The 'runes', they said,
described spaceships which arrived on our planet some twelve
thousand years ago, piloted by a race of beings called the
Dropas (or 'Dzopas'). When the Dropas descended from the skies
in their flying machines, say the inscriptions, the earthlings
fled in fear and hid in caves until they received signs from the
visitors that no harm was to come to them.

The study group compared their findings with information
gathered by the 1938 expedition, which had collected old
folklore from the region. The people of Baian-Kara-Ula had
spoken of creatures who once lived in the same area in
antiquity, also called Dropas (or "Khams"). The Dropas, they
said, were humanoid but hideously ugly and measured no more than
130 centimetres in height. As their name suggests, they were
mountain- dwellers (in Tibetan 'drok-pa' means 'men of the
mountains'). Unfortunately, the University of Beijing refused to
acknowledge the findings and forbade Tsum Um Nui to make the
results of his investigations known. The skeletons were
officially 'identified' as belonging to an extinct species of
monkey, and the discs were simply ignored. Clearly the discovery
had been too spectacular, too controversial and too potentially
damaging to the dogma of the period. And there was something
else: on the cave walls where the discs were found, the
expedition came across strange painted images. "Inscriptions
were clearly distinguished that depicted the sun, the moon and
the nine planets of our solar system, all recorded on the rocky
walls. They were pea-sized dots which appeared to show the
position of the Earth."

Or at least this is the legend. It has proved extremely
difficult to obtain more details, or verify those already
accumulated, due to aabeijing University's denial that any of
the events here mentioned had ever occurred. Most of the above
information has come to us through a Soviet philologist of the
University of Minsk, Wjatschew Saitsew, now deceased. The
whereabouts of the discs is no longer known, and neither do we
know the location of the cave or the remains found therein. The
first and last time a European allegedly saw one of the discs
first-hand was in 1974 in the museum of Xian, although photos of
a couple of the discs have been obtained and published since
then by the Austrian researcher Peter Krassa.

It is possible that all or just a part of the story is true.
Official denials prove nothing for truths can be just as
strongly denied as falsehoods. It certainly seems more than mere
coincidence that the remains of the beings described in the
original report (if such remains and report ever existed) fit
the usual 'alien' profile so well, especially in light of the
strong 'little men' tradition throughout Asia. However, so
little proof has been forthcoming to support the story that it
would be inappropriate to jump to any conclusions at this stage.
The subject of UFOs is so steeped in disinformation and error
that many years may still have to pass before the truth is
finally revealed, if, of course, there exists any truth to be
revealed.

EXTRATERRESTRIAL FOSSILS IN THE GOBI DESERT?

In June 1996, in fact not long after giving up on finding any
hard data on the alleged 1938 finding, I read a report in a
Spanish magazine about certain "extraterrestrial fossils" that
had supposedly been found beneath the sands of the Gobi desert.
My efforts to trace this new information to its original source
failed miserably and I soon realised it was very unlikely there
was any substance to it at all. However, for the sake of
thoroughness and as a kind of 'postscript' to the Baian-Kara-Ula
case, the following is a translation of the short article:

"Extraterrestrial Fossils?

Mongolian ufologists have announced that, underneath the Gobi
desert, in an area rich in dinosaur remains, Chinese and North
American scientists are concealing the existence of
extraterrestrial bodies. The investigators claim that the bodies
were photographed by palaeontologists. Among the remains there
was a being measuring 1.20 metres in height, with a
disproportionate cranium and pointed bones."


I have never met a Mongolian ufologist and am not sure they
exist any more than the alien fossils do. But I'd be pleased to
receive a reply from one if they read this letter.

Thanks for your time,

Chris Aubeck








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:33:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:33:20 -0400
Subject: N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947



 From UFO UpDates - Toronto



OCR-ed by ebk from a .jpg at Jeff Rense's site:

http://sightings.com/general10/historic.htm

New York Times
Wednesday, July 9, 1947

Page 1 - Lead Story

'Disk' Near Bomb Test Site
Is Just a Weather Balloon

Warrant Officer Solves a Puzzle That Baffled His Superiors -
'Flying Saucer' Tales Pour in From Round the World

By MURRAY SCHUMACH

Celestial crockery had the Army up in the air for several hours
yesterday - before an Army officer explained that what a
colleague thought was "a flying disk" was nothing more than a
battered Army weather balloon.

This denouncement closed the New Mexico chapter in the "flying
saucer" saga that already had contributions from forty-three
other states in the Union as well as from Australia. England,
South Africa, Mexico and Canada.

However, - none of the previous or subsequent reports of strange
heavenly bodies created as much confusion as the startling
announcement from an Army Lieutenant that "a flying disk" had
been found on a ranch near Roswell. N. M, near the scene of
atomic bomb tests. The officer, Lieut. Warren Haught, public
information officer of the Roswell Army Air Field, made no
bones about the discovery in his detailed report as carried by
The Associated Press.

�The many rumors regarding the flying disk became a reality,"
his statement began. He told which Intelligence Office of what
Bomb Group of the Eighth Air Force had passed "the flying disk"
along "to higher headquarters."

The phones began to buzz between Washington and New Mexico and
the "disk" was well on the way to showing how the circle could
be squared. One by one, as the rank of the Investigating officer
rose, the circle lost arcs and developed sides until it was
roughly octagonal. Within an hour after Lieutenant Haught had
given new impetus to the "flying saucer" derby, his boss, Brig.
Gen. Roger Ramey, had a somewhat different version of "the
flying disk."

He said that while It was true It had been found on a ranch, no
one had seen it in the air; it was "of flimsy construction,"
apparently

Continued on Page 10, Column 4

'Disk' Found on New Mexico Ranch
Is Just an Army Weather Balloon

Continued From Page 1

made "of some sort of tin foil." Subsequently, it was reported
being flown to a research laboratory at Wright Field, Ohio.

In Washington, Leiut, Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg. Deputy Chief of the
Army Air Forces, hurried to his headquarter's press section.
Atomic experts In the capital were certain that whatever had
been found was not any of their doing, but no one seemed to know
just how to dispose of the object.

Finally, a lowly warrant officer, Irving Newton, a forecaster at
the Fort Worth, Texas weather station, solved the mystery. He
said it was just a part of a weather balloon, such as is used by
eighty weather stations in the country to determine velocity and
direction of winds at high altitudes.

Several hours before the New Mexico mystery had been solved a
Canadian meteorologist suggested the same answer in connection
with the rumors of "flying saucer" in Circleville, Ohio. This was
soon after a couple in the Ohio town had jubilantly proclaimed
ther "Capture" of a mysterious disk.

However, the midwest was spurred in its hunt by offers of $3,000
rewards for "proof that America was not succumbing to an
epidemic of hallucinations. One of the first to put in a claim
for the prize was an Iowa salesman, who produced a steel disc,
nearly seven inches in diameter. He said he found it in his
yard in the morning after hearing it "crash through the trees."
According to The United Press, reporters thought the disk was
playing truant from an ash tray.

Then there was this Nebraska farmer who added a bucolic touch to
the story. He said the heavenly bodies were "flaming straw hats,'
that careened through the night, sometimes pausing for a rest.

Michigan's contributor for the day was a toolmaker from Pontiac.
According to The United Press he turned over to newspapers a
picture showing two circular objects against a black
back-ground. Examination showed holes in the disks.

Also in the act was Wisconsin, where it was reported that on
Monday 250 pilots of that state's Civil Air Patrol would take
off in search of "flying saucers."

Proof that "flying saucers" were not indigenous to the United
States and Canada began coming in late in the afternoon. Two
residents of Johannesburg. South Africa, said, according to
Reuters, that they not only saw the objects, but that these
"traveled at tremendous speed in -V-formation and disappeared in
a cloud of smoke."

In England, a clergyman's wife, who said she had kept her
discovery secret for fear of derision, finally came forth
yesterday with a story about seeing "a dark ring, with clear-cut
edges," that sped across the sky on Monday.

The Australian variations of "the flying saucer," though
reported by six persons in Sydney, were quite ordinary.
Observers said they were a bit brighter than the moon, seemed to
prefer an altitude of about 10,000 feet and moved along rather
briskly.

It may have been the weather, but the only allusion to "flying
saucers" in New York City were a few skeptical remarks by
Admiral William H. P. Blandy, Commander in Chief of the
Atlantic fleet. Said the admiral, in response to questions:

"I remain to be convinced there is any such thing. I am
convinced that they are nothing the Army and Navy is concerned
with. I am curious, like everybody else, to see what's behind
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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     Re: OK How About This...? - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:36:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:44:42 -0400
Subject: Re: OK How About This...? - Randles


 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:07:40 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: OK How About This...?
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >We all know what the outcome of those claims have been:

 >No proof.

Hi,

This interesting comment in the recent discussion is for me the
heart and soul of the problem. This debate about congressional
hearings - whether Steven Greer did us right or wrong - what we
should do to have a 'serious' press conference - is pointless
unless we know what we want to with it. And that is not as easy
as it seems.

Why?

Because nobody will ever convince science, congress or anyone
much outside our own little world of UFO witnesses and
investigators by following the sort of press conference being
discussed here. We have faith in Ufology, at least mostly as a
consequence of our trust built up by personal observation or by
years of listening to witnesses that some of these stories are
'true'. This is even though we know that some of the stories
most definitely are not !

Put yourself in the place of others who have not spent years
reaching that conclusion by direct experience and you will see
why witness testimony is never going to bring about any kind of
revolution. It will fail because it is fallible. And if it
fallible it is dismissable by those (and there are many) to whom
that is the easier option.

Think about how NASA is trying to prove life on Mars. It isn't
holding press conferences with Dr Cleverbod saying to the
cameras 'I 'know' there are martians because I saw one once
through my telescope but, er, I was too late to take a picture
and it hasn't show up again since...'  Followed by Ima Bigwig
reporting 'My team are convinced that there are martians because
we have made a study of marks on Syrtis Major and found that
they change shape every 47th Wednesday proving that there is an
intelligent pattern and...'

As you can imagine, if NASA were trying to do this (regardless
of the sincerity or the veracity of some of the anecdotal
evidence they 'might' offer) they would get nowhere - except
into plenty of ridicule. NASA know perfectly well that to make
any kind of statement at a press conference that stands a chance
of persuading important doubters it 'must' present evidence that
can be handed over to independent judges to assess so its not
just 'their word'.

If you have a piece of Mars rock with what you think are
microbes inside then you can explain your reasons and expect
others to try to verify or deny them. That's the sort of
evidence that will be heard. That's the 'only' sort of evidence
that Ufology should even be considering putting before any kind
of press conference right now.

Impossible? Not at all. But its a lot harder than simply
shuffling up to a few microphones and spouting what we think.

Here are three things that we could (and in my view should) do
before even considering the kind of steps being talked about on
this list.

1: Determine amongst the UFO community (by a good old fashioned
data hunt) if there is 'any' solid evidence suggestive of
something scientifically anomalous behind any UFO case. Collate
our best analysis work on that hard evidence. Secure the
evidence. Make it available after the press conference for
others to conduct independent checks. One of the few things I
can think of (but there may be others you can suggest) is the
Sydney 'abduction' hair sample that produced intriguing DNA
readings. That's 'hard' evidence of the sort I suggest we need
here. What else is there like it?

2: Do a similar thorough data search of all the UFO still /
movie / video footage in the world. What is the one case that
you consider most interesting in your country / neck of the
woods? Between us we can probably identify half a dozen truly
impressive cases that have not been resolved - that have been
intensively investigated - for which there are proper lab tests
and back up data - and - most importantly - where the
negatives/etc can be made available via the press conference for
independent study by those we expect to convince.

3: Make some actual effort to collate new data that we could
present to such a press conference and give the media a brand
new angle also . This isn't by any means that difficult. We all
know that there are window areas around the world where UFO
events show up with much greater frequency than elsewhere. In
the UK we have the Pennine Hills. In the US you have Marfa,
Texas. In Australia the min-min lights in around Queensland. In
Northern Europe there is Hessdalen. And so on. Even if only 100
ufologists (and there are more of you on this list alone) got
together and agreed give some time and effort during a one month
period later this year - an agreed period when we all
concentrated our efforts to 'stake out' these window area sites
- we ought to be able to come up with something.  By 'stake out'
I don't just mean a big sky watch at all the worlds window
areas. I mean a properly thought out global exercise to pool
resources, equipment (cameras, EM recording instruments, etc)
and properly organise a coordinated series of scientific data
searches at the agreed areas of high activity with plans
designed to maximise the collection of hard evidence. Such an
experiment might fail and produce nothing. It might shock us all
and provide stunning new evidence. But it has a pretty fair
chance of producing at least something from somewhere. And if it
does - along with the data in points 1 and 2 above - we have
genuine grounds to start planning a press conference.

But, I suggest, lets do the work 'before' even considering
facing the cameras. Because that's the only way I think we stand
a chance of being listened to. And that's what we want - not
some 'retaliation strike' or to stake a claim for 'our slice of
glory'.

This is about making a difference - changing the direction of
UFO research. And that is not unachievable. But it will be by
retreading over old ground or doing what's been tried and failed
often before.

I think we have to accept what will (rightly) be expected of us
when seeking to persuade others - and that is the tangible
evidence, not further 'believe me or not' stories from however
qualified a person who makes such a grand claim.

Just a few thoughts on the current debate .

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:34:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:47:20 -0400
Subject: Re: 2001 A Space Odissey - In Gray - Aldrich


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 2001 A Space Odyssey - In Gray
 >Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:36:27 -0400

 >>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: 2001 A Space Odyssey - In Gray
 >>Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:27:55 +0200

 >>On November 12, 2000 I posted a comment answering (only half
 >>tongue in cheek) Mr. Sandow's petition about a main SF film
 >>showing abduction iconography but predating abductions.

 >>I suggested "2001: A Space Odissey" but Mr. Sandow did not care
 >>to comment, as usual with my arguments.

 >>Well, by pure serendipity, I have discovered a new point for my
 >>case.

 >>We, HPS-ers, have long pointed to Whitley Strieber's best seller
 >>"Communion" as the main culprit for spreading the Grey face
 >>image (with its big black eyes) all over the world, in the cover
 >>of his book.

 >>But now, I have discovered that 20 years before, another alien
 >>face stared to the people (at least in the USA). This face
 >>showed a big head, a small nose, a simple line as mouth and two
 >>big human eyes. It was the Star Child from the 2001 film.

 >>Reading a Spanish book about the Kubrick film (pag. 72, "2001.
 >>La Odisea contina", Raul Alda, Ediciones Jaguar, Madrid, 2001,
 >>ISBN: 84-89960-83-6) I found myself staring at a frontal
 >>close-up of the Star Child's face in an Americam promotional
 >>poster of the time, under the heading "the ultimate trip".

 >>Exactly, up to the _normal_ eyes, as Travis Walton described his
 >>aliens.

 >'Killers From Space' starring Peter Graves was released 23 Jan
 >1954. It has medical operation on the abductee, the eyes of the
 >abductors are constantly bothering Graves' character. The actual
 >story is retrieved by truth serium.


Found another such movie. Again from 1953, "Invaders from Mars"
tells the story of a boy who see a flying saucer land during a
storm. No one believes him, however, the towns people are
abducted and subject to a mind altered state. The abductees are
put on a table and examined and placed under mine control.

This is a real cheapie. The Maritan are large green humanoids
with bugeyes which have slits. The controling entity is smaller
with a big head, but a human face.

Regards,

Jan Aldrich









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:12:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:49:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

<snip>

 >Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >and pseudoscience.

 >Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?


Dick,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this had already been
done, or at least semi-done, with the Berliner book. Didn't
Rockefeller pay to have a thousand or so copies distributed to
Congressional staffers and other influential pols?

And then, of course, Greer appropriated it and tried to do it
all over again!

But, seriously... what, if any kind of response came from that
effort? Is there anything that's significantly changed the
political landscape since then?

If memory serves, Bigelow also paid to distribute over 100,000
copies of the flawed Roper Report to medical health officials.
What, if anything, came of that effort?

I hate to be overly cynical, but politicians are in business to
get reelected. Call for a Congressional investigation of UFOs?
You might as well shoot yourself in the head at close range with
a shotgun or take a permanent leave of absence, because you sure
as hell won't have a chamber seat the next time Congress
reconvenes.

Ain't gonna happen, unless there's some series of events to stir
the national pot, as happened the last time with the Michigan
Flap, when Gerald Ford was an influential congressman from
there.

The 50th anniversary of Roswell, with Steven Schiff pushing,
resulted in a GAO and Air Force investigation, but the wind is
now out of that sail, too. The Phoenix Lights flap never got
very far off the ground.

Only totally unpredictable events will drive action now,
especially in this climate. Senators and representatives are
swamped with stuff and suggestions from their consitutents. They
have large staffs in place precisely to weed out this sort of
stuff. Most of them probably don't have the time to read an
outside book about _anything_ because they're too busy raising
money for the next election. And money in UFOs there is not --
unless you can get everyone who listens to Art Bell to chip in a
dollar or two to a specific candidate. That might turn at least
one head, but his or hers better be a very influential one.

Of course, if the aliens would just abduct more Congress persons
we wouldn't have this problem. Any ideas as to how _that_ might
be arranged?

Maybe even that ploy wouldn't help. If I recall aright, the
Secretary General of the United Nations was once allegedly
abducted, and it didn't seem to motivate that organization much.

Don't forget how McDonald was treated by the House Committee
earlier. Do you think Budd or Dave would be treated any better
today? Hopkins, for one, would be flayed alive over "Witnessed."
It would not be a pretty sight on C-Span.

Again, just my cynical two cents...

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                   Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:14:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:52:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire


Greetings List,

For those following the events reported in February 2001 over
the East Coast of Yorkshire - when a mystery sonic boom rocked a
number of townships, here is the latest:

Scarborough Evening News (North Yorkshire)

17 May 2001


BOOM MYSTERY AS PLANE AND A QUAKE RULED OUT

RAF investigators deny military aircraft was responsible for the
apparent sonic boom which rocked Scarborough in February.

The announcement has only deepended the mystery of what caused
the noise which was felt along the East Coast from north of
Whitby to south of Filey.

The Ministry of Defence denial means there could only be a
handful of explanations for the boom.

It could have been caused by a meteorite, the wildest theory
being aliens from outer space.

Experts at the British Geological Survey in Edinburgh said its
instruments proved conclusively the noise in Scarborough on
February 21 was not caused by an earthquake.

They said the most likely cause was a sonic boom, but did not
know what had caused it.

The Ministry of Defence said in a letter to Evening News
reporter Chris Nixon: "After a thorough investigation into this
incident, the RAF Police concluded that military aircraft were
not responsible for generating the noise you heard.

"Although a number of aircraft were operating in the area, radar
evidence has shown that at no time did they operate at
supersonic speeds."

A sonic boom can occur when an aircraft breaks the sound barrier
at supersonic speed during certain weather conditions.

The only civilian aircraft capable of supersonic speeds is
Concorde - all the fleet has been grounded since the Paris air
disaster in August last year, apart from a Concorde test flight
from the French capital to the south of France.

Glen Ford, a seismologist at the British Geological Survey, said
that on the day of the incident in Scarborough "a spurious
signal" had been picked up on equipment in Leeds.

"We had an earthquake last Sunday in Dumfries in Galloway, but
there has not been an earthquake in Scarborough," said Mr Ford.

He said the earthquake was felt over a circular area.

The incident in Scarborough was most likely a sonic boom because
it was felt in a straight line down the cost, said Mr Ford.

"A pressure wave can travel great distances. In this case it
seems to have gone across the North Sea and then smacked into
the East Coast. Something definitely whacked the coastline.

"A sonic boom can be caused by a meteorite entering the earth's
atmosphere and in the past there have been reports of
spectacular lights being seen on the north-east [coast].

"In one case this effect was caused when a Russian satellite
broke up and entered the atmosphere.

"On one occasion off Hartlepool there was a sonic boom caused by
RAF Tornadoes exercising which caused buildings to be
evacuated."

The Evening News reported the same week as the apparent sonic
boom that a meteorite shower was seen off the East Coast, but it
seems we will never know for certain what caused Scarborough to
"go bump in the day" rather than "bump in the night."










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                       Re: Talk And Action - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:46:18 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:55:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Friedman


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:13:03 +0100

 >Regarding:

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >Richard wrote:

 >>I am going to propose a unified effort by all of you who claim
 >>you are serious about trying to do something constructive that
 >>is better than the Greer fiasco. But first, I strongly suspect
 >>(but hope I am wrong) that many of you probably have never taken
 >>out a membership or contributed a dime to any of the serious
 >>groups, or supported their publication programs.

 >>If not, then you have no idea of all the hard work and heroic
 >>effort, the accomplishments with very little financial support.
 >>I am speaking primarily of the UFO Research Coalition and the
 >>three groups it comprises:

 >>The Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network, and the Fund
 >>for UFO Research, not to mention the abduction-related groups of
 >>Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs. Support them, or shut up! If they
 >>had the funds, they could easily outperform Greer, and do so
 >>responsibly.

 >Richard,

 >Regarding your affirmation of what comprises... erm... 'serious'
 >ufology, it clearly confirms you endorse, 'those SOB aliens that
 >have been kidnapping us'.

 >Are you really sure about this?

 >It seems somewhat distant from the scientific recognition which
 >supposedly 'serious' ufology laments never being achieved in
 >over fifty years. Are stories that, 'creatures from another
 >world selected _me_', now taken seriously by the media instead
 >of being subjected to understandable ridicule?

 >How the hell could Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs "outperform
 >Greer, and do so responsibly"? Presumably only by arranging a
 >press conference for 'alien abductees'?

 >And you're declaring this represents the antithesis of Greer?

 >Claiming that Greer isn't indicative of 'ufology, you also
 >implore that we should support MUFON as representative of the
 >'UFO Research Coalition'. Yet, as I recently highlighted:

 >MUFON - the world's largest 'UFO' organisation - promote Greer's
 >'Campaign for Disclosure'.

 >Their forthcoming symposium has also invited:

 >- Dr Roger Leir on 'alien implants'
 >- Mack and Hopkins on 'alien abductions'
 >- Friedman, Robert and Ryan Wood on the reality of 'MJ-12'


Gee Jim , there you go again. The second time you say I am
talking about MJ-12 at MUFON 2001. Wrong again. My paper title
is "Flying Saucers and the Cosmic Neighborhood". It is NOT about
MJ-12. If you read my 2000 MUFON paper, you would note that I
demonstrated that a number of the newer Tim Cooper MJ-12
documents are fraudulent emulations of real documents published
earlier and with slight changes to make the deception harder to
establish.

Whether you and Brad Sparks want to dismiss MJ-12 (EBD, TF, CT
memos) as frauds doesn't make it so. I did read Corso's book and
met with him, his son, and Birnes. And also did checking with
the Army Archives and the Ike Library. Have you read TOP
SECRET/MAJIC, and my 108pg."Final Report on Operation Majestic
12," and my 37pg "Operation Majestic 12? YES!" paper and
assorted others ? Or are you just echoing noisy negativist
research by proclamation.?

 >Dr Steven Greer.
 >[END]

<snip>

 >Given that Friedman, Leir, Robert and Ryan Wood will readily
 >take UFO Research Coalition/MJ-12/abductee/alien implant/devoid
 >from any reality stage with Greer, that's _exactly_ what it is.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I consider Bob and
Ryan and Roger colleagues. Does that mean I agree with
everything they say? Of course not. After all just because I
have done a number of radio and Tv shows with Phil Klass, and
even appeared in a formal debate with him, doesn't mean I agree
with him. Appearing on the same stage (consider Gore and Bush)
doesn't imply agreement.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

              Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:59:45 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:58:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >UFOs.

 >Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >green men.

 >Great job Nick!


Kelly,

Where have you been? I have been doing radio and TV interviews
about UFOs for more than 30 years, always coming on very
strongly (I am _not_ an apologist ufologist) and in more than
90% of the cases have been treated very fairly, openly,
respectfully.. or whatever positive words you want to use.

There have been some rather nasty hosts Like Dr. Morton Schulman
in Toronto. Nobody bats 1.000, but I am including Regis Philbin
many years ago, Steve Allen, Merv Griffin, Tom Snider, Mike
Douglas, Pamela Wallen, Leeza, Sally Jesse Raphael, Larry King
and a very long list of others. It should be no surprise, then,
that I have had only 11 hecklers (2 of whom were drunk) at more
than 700 lectures including loads to professional groups.

Remember Gallup Polls have consistently showed that "believers"
outnumber non-believers and that the greater the education the
more likely to accept UFO reality. There is no need to be
"closet" ufologists..... There is a need to have data in hand
and a sense of humor.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:08:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:01:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:23:12 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 >>Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:53:06 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Case 10 of the "Twelve Good Unknowns" reported in Project Blue
 >>Book Special Report #14 was an "enigma wrapped in a mystery"
 >>until I investigated the Blue Book microfilm file at the
 >>National Archives and (finally!) found the original data
 >>(witness interviews). Now the case is "merely" an enigma.

 >>I mentioned it when I saw the George Filer (Filer's Files) had
 >>recently posted a sighting from the Rogue River area several
 >>weeks ago.

 >>What was that pancake-shaped object/craft, anyway?

 >>I invite you to see for yourself and try to explain this enigma.>

 >>Go to:

 >>http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue River.html



 >Hello Bruce:

 >I got a 404 error from FreeServers when I clicked on the URL
 >below. Didya leave out some Dubyas or lasagnas or something?

 >Here's the error message, slightly edited:

 >"404 Error - File Not Found
 >The page or file you are looking for
 >http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.

HJmmmm... it worked for me.

Try simply:

http://brumac.8k.com

or

www.brumac.8k.com

and read down the opening page until you find reference to Case
10 (the first listed sighting on the web page) and click on
Rogue River.

Should work.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                          Talk And Action - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:19:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:04:10 -0400
Subject: Talk And Action - Felder


 >From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
 >Date: 18 May 2001 08:32:07 -0700
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hamilton

<snip>

 >Gee Dick, my mouth is usually bigger than my pocketbook, but
 >I will see what I can do. Of course I would want two copies as
 >I need one for my library that is squeezing me out of house and
 >home so I know what these congressman have to read on a dark
 >and stormy night. I wonder, will they read this book?

Hell, no, they aren't gonna read this book or any other book on
UFOs. If they wanted to do that, they would have done it
already. A Congressman wants a 5 minute briefing, thank you for
stopping by, and leave the printed material with his aide on
your way out.

This whole Greer/Disclosure circus has gone beyond ridiculous,
in my opinion. Even Jason Leigh is now trying to grab on to the
bandwagon by yelling copyright infringement! When did he get out
of jail, anyway?

Serious ufo research may be very serious indeed.

"UFOLOGY" has become a total joke, however.

Back to lurk mode. Somebody wake me up if anything interesting or
anything worth noticing comes along.


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

                          Filer's Files #20 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:51:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:22:59 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #20 -- 2000


Filer's Files #20 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director
Mutual UFO Network Eastern May 15, 2001
Sponsored by Electronic Arts; Majorstar@aol.com.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com

SPONSORED BY: www.discountlongdistanceservices.com for
incredible savings on phone cards, cell phones, and much much
more.


UFOs REPORTED OVER US AND ENGLAND. UFOs observed over New York,
Michigan, California, Washington, and England.

DISCLOSURE PROJECT AN INITIAL SUCCESS

Dr. Greer and a dedicated unpaid staff have made a mighty first
step towards the validation of UFOs and alien life forms. I
consider it an honor to have participated with twenty former
government employees who staked their reputations on the UFO
concepts they expounded. Each of us had only a few minutes to
describe what we knew about UFOs. Many had excellent evidence
in their procession including FAA tapes and government
documentation. I had an opportunity to talk to most of the
witnesses and staff at great length. They are some of the
finest and most knowledgeable people I have had the pleasure of
meeting. Their information on UFOs far surpasses most other
Ufologists. Dr. Steven Greer should be congratulated for
finding these insiders and organizing the Disclosure Project.
The press conference held at the National Press Club on May 9th
was excellent. I talked with several reporters afterwards who
were very impressed. They had never seen so many cameras and
reporters at a pres! s conference, at least not since President
Reagan was there over twenty years ago. Furthermore, the two
hundred reporters stayed for hours applauding until the very
end. I was told that at most press conferences the reporters
leave in a few minutes. I could see a major shift in their
mindset as one after another the witnesses testified. I felt
many debunkers changed their minds about the reality of UFOs.
They indicated it would be tough to get their editors to
publish this material but they had a new respect for the
subject. Judging by the questions and interest I personally
received from the Dateline, Mexican TV, and BCC, the UFO
Disclosure is gaining powerful allies. Let us be realistic, it
is not easy to change the minds and the inherent paradigm
shattering implications of this information. These very
skeptical reporters were amazed to see credible proof of ETs
and UFOs. We made valiant efforts after the press conference to
reach every Senator and Representative in Congress! . The
congressmen are concerned about their jobs and it will be
interesting to see if even one has the patriotism and courage
of Gerald Ford who requested hearings as a congressman in 1966.

The Disclosure Project would likely have reached a much greater
audience if the FBI had not released information that thousands
of critical files in the Timothy McVeigh case had not been
disclosed to his lawyers. It seems rather strange that all this
"missing" data concerning the Oklahoma City case had suddenly
been found and was released at the most critical time when the
Disclosure Project was ready to hit the headlines. Most people
assume it is a foregone conclusion that McVeigh will still be
executed. The only purpose can be to prolong his execution in
order to control the content of all the major media. McVeigh
claims the bombing was the result of FBI action at Waco. He is
not contesting his execution, but the Internet is full of
stories indicating Iraqi involvement in the bombing.

The Disclosure Project has fired its first cannon shot heard
around the world by an estimated billion people. The main goal
was not designed to reveal any "smoking gun" evidence, at this
time but to request immunity for other witnesses and to obtain
Congressional hearings. This is a major first step. I encourage
all UFO organizations to hold similar press briefings, call
radio talk shows, and contact their Congressmen. For
information on the testimony and other events to follow, go to:
www.disclosureproject.org

INDIAN OCEAN SIGHTING

Steve Markle writes, "Thanks for your appearance at the
Disclosure Project events in DC, along with your continued
commitment in this area!" As a helicopter rescue aircrew man
and antisubmarine warfare operator in the Navy (SECRET
clearance), I too can attest to having seen something mighty
strange out in the Indian Ocean one night in the mid 70's,
along with several other individuals on my ship, the USS
Fanning! We saw a bright object, undulating and flickering with
colors. It was stationary for 30 minutes. We witnessed several
coronal discharges from object that floated down toward ocean
surface. It was much like footage of recent events in Gulf
Breeze, Florida. Within moments of final coronal discharge, the
object left its location at a very high rate of speed up and
out of the atmosphere! The departure of object created a streak
of light effect much like the computer mouse comparison!
Frankly we were all stunned and in shock at what we'd just
seen! My shipmates in our air ! detachment (HSL-35, Det.1) just
looked at one another and simultaneously asked out loud "WHAT
in the HELL was THAT? From that time on, I was convinced of
UFO's were ET craft! If that was one of ours, we clearly
conquered antigravidics in the 60's or 70's!! I too, would be
willing to testify as to what I saw that evening. Thank you for
your continued efforts, your courage, and your patriotism!
Thanks to Steve Markle, smarkle@pa.net (Markle)

WEB CAST JAMMING?

According to the management of ConnectLive.com, which was
airing the web cast of the Disclosure Project press conference,
they were hit with sophisticated jamming. They had never
experience anything like it in the hundreds of web casts they
had conducted in the past. It was not hacking and it was not
bandwidth problems. Although the web cast was down for about 10
to 15% of the time over 250,000 people saw the web cast of the
press conference.

YOU CAN HELP

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Disclosure Project - whose legislative
agenda includes open hearings, and a comprehensive plan for
cooperative, peaceful space development, continues meeting with
Members of Congress. If you support these goals, please begin
contacting your US Senators and your Congressperson urging them
to support Open Hearings on the Disclosure agenda. The
Disclosure Team has met with over two dozen senate and house
members and staff with witnesses present. I personally met with
three congressional staffs and one Congressman. I ask that you
write your 2 senators and their house representative and ask
for immediate open hearings on the UFO matter. Political
constituency pressure does work! You can find the name, phone,
fax, and email address of your two Senators and your
Congressperson at: http://www.senate.gov http://www.house.gov
Petition forms, Congressional addresses, etc. can be found at:
http://www.disclosureproject.org

NEW YORK SIGHTINGS OF FLYING SAUCERS

TICONDEROGA -- Investigator John Thompson writes, "I got a call
from the NY witness who video taped a UFO in July 1998." He
says that he saw the same UFO again on Thursday, May 11, 2001,
and almost videotaped it but his battery was dead. It was a
daylight sighing again and he says he saw the exact same
object. This UFO is also the same UFO that was photographed in
LaGrange, GA in Feb. 1997. The New York witness says he
reported this all to Jim B., MUFON NY State Director. Thanks to
John Thompson.

RUSSELL PARK -- Paul M. Davis writes my friends and I have been
going to the Mohawk Valley in upstate New York near Ilion. Year
after year we saw flying saucers in the night sky. They
performed incredible flight performances, step maneuvers,
hovering motionless then shooting from east to west in a split
second. I believe they were under intelligent control because
they were able to perform hot rod like movements and avoid each
other in unison. These are not just lights in the sky, but
metallic objects that seem to emit some kind of plasma trail. I
suspect that that is the reason why they look fuzzy in
photographs. My friends and I had experienced seeing strange
lights in the woods, very bright, and orangish in color.

We walked through strange hot and cold force field like pockets
of air. It would go from 70 degrees at night to be instant of
approximately 30 degrees below zero then walking out of the
zone to encounter the next patch of air that was over 102
degrees Fahrenheit. I bent down to tie my boots and noticed
strange footprints in the mud that seemed to start and stop as
if this thing was beamed up or picked up from that spot. I used
my flashlight to examine the print. I am familiar with most
animal foot and paw prints as well as humans boots, sneakers,
or shoes. This was not like any of those prints. The prints
were from an animal that must have been bipedal as it had a
curve or horizontal instep to it. It also had three toes and no
pattern name or sneaker tread on the bottom of the print. I
came back the next day after it had rained. The prints were all
damaged except for one. I got a shovel and a box and tried to
transplant the entire foot print, feeling that this was better
then ! copying it with plaster or fiberglass resin. The print
was so water logged that it fell apart as I tried to transfer
it to the box. I was very disappointed that I did not get the
print. At least it would have been some sort of proof.

The biggest mistake began when my cousin Israel DuPont and I
went into the park one night with our flashlights to poke
around looking for more alien footprints. We found nothing. We
approached a soccer field near some giant water tanks near the
main road. We were again confronted with flying disks in the
night sky flying about erratically. We decided to sit down and
watch the show. A few minutes passed. I noted that my watch
read 2:00 AM. We were to be picked up within the next half
hour. We sat across from each other and began to talk. A few
moments later my cousin Israel said, "What's that over your
head?" I flashed my flashlight up above my head in a signal
like motion. The next thing we recall is coming to slowly in
great muscular and nerve pain. I tried to focus my eyes. Some
type of blinding white light had attacked us. I could hear my
cousin moaning in pain. He was as stunned as I was. I called
out to him. "What was that?" and looked at my watch and 20
minutes had passe! d. We ran through the woods and barely caught
our ride 2:30 AM ride. (To be continued) Thanks to Paul M.
Davis and MUFON HQ.

PENNSYLVANIA LOW LEVEL DIAMOND SHAPED OBJECT

ACME -- Stan Gordon writes he has investigated a UFO sighting
that occurred on April, 4, 2001, in a rural area of
Westmoreland County. I interviewed the witness the day after
the sighting, and have obtained additional information. The
witness and her husband were watching TV when her husband saw a
light in the woods behind the house, which appeared low to the
ground. The wife went into the living room, and opened up the
sliding doors. Within seconds, a very large diamond shaped
object appeared from directly over the house, and continued to
move over the trees in the back woods. The object moved fast
and in a steady manner, as it passed only about 150 feet
overhead. The object was seen for only about 8 seconds, when it
suddenly seemed to vanish just above the trees. The object was
observed from underneath, and was described as a large solid
diamond shaped object, which made a humming sound as it passed
overhead. Non-blinking white lights were at each corner with a
red light in ! the bottom center of the object.

Immediately after the sighting, the couple drove towards the
location where the object disappeared but saw nothing. The
witness reported feeling very nervous and could not sleep well
for a couple of days. The couple had been feeding raccoons
every night for a month before this event, but they failed to
show the night of the sighting. The day of the sighting was the
first evening that the animals did not show up, but they
returned the next night. UFO sightings continue to be reported
across Pennsylvania. UFO Hotline: 724-838-7768 paufo@westol.com
http://www.westol.com/~paufo

MICHIGAN BLACK AIRCRAFT SIGHTING

UPPER PENINSULA -- Several weeks ago, with the aid of 8x40
binoculars my wife, daughter, and I observed an aircraft flying
over our home. The aircraft is strikingly similar to the third
one from the left at the top of the page in the Black Aircraft
section of your site www.filersfiles.com. The aircraft was
flying at an altitude of about 30,000 feet and emitting two
contrails parallel to each other. The tail-section of the
aircraft is of unconventional design. The fuselage's color is a
light brown to tan color. I was a weather observer and
forecasters assistant for the Air Force for six years and have
served in the Army National Guard. The celestial dome was
nearly four-tenths covered by cumulus at the low and middle
echelons during this early afternoon sighting. The craft was
traveling from south to north, and along an airway used by our
commercial airliners. We can't see the tail-section of the
aircraft you have pictured in the Black Aircraft section of
your site. But, from w! hat we can see right now -- it matches
the aircraft we saw during its flyover, exactly. The
tail-section of the craft didn't appear to have any horizontal
stabilizers. It did have somewhat defined vertical pitch at the
hindmost or aft section. My 17 year-old daughter commented, "It
looks like a rocket." The craft was cruising at normal airliner
speed. Thanks to Randy Braun, StalkingMoon@webtv.net

JACKSON -- On April 27, 2001, I noticed a contrail being made
in the northern sky at about 8:10 PM. The object making the
trail was moving extremely fast. Three or four times as fast as
a jet plane and at an altitude (guessing) of maybe 20 to 25,000
feet, It was going south when it made a 180 degree turn within
3 seconds, still leaving a trail. Then about 5 seconds after it
turned around the craft disappeared. I kept looking for about a
minute or so and saw the object again, (no trail) going west
then east then west again, all in a span of ten or fifteen
seconds. It then disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport
Director http://www.ufocenter.com

WASHINGTON FLYING TRIANGLE

TROUT LAKE -- On May 9, 2001, John and Kim Novak, wrote that
James Gilliland, another adult witness and I saw a large, very
slow moving triangle fly nearly over head. The craft was first
spotted right underneath the Big Dipper and headed in a
southwest direction at a very slow rate of speed until it
disappeared above the trees at 10:20 PM. There was absolutely
no sound. I extended my hand out several times to gauge the
size of it and I was able to just about cover it's size with my
fist. The entire length of time it was in my view was 4-5
minutes. Either this was three independent lights each about
the size of an average star in the sky traveling in an
absolutely perfect triangular pattern, or it was one very large
triangular shaped object with a light at each point.

We tend to think it was one object based on the fact that it
appeared to be tipping on it's side several times. All the
lights moved exactly the way a large triangular object with a
light on each point would making a maneuver like this. Someone
inside the house turned on all the lights right when James got
the video camera on it. So he had to pick up the camera and run
to a shaded spot. He wasn't able to see the triangle through
the viewfinder, but just pointing the camera at it zooming in
and out hoping for the best. He was able to get a few shots of
it. Another note of interest in this sighting is that Kim and I
had our 3 year old son out skywatching with us for the first
time. We asked him to show us where the spaceships were. He
pointed right to the area where the triangle was first spotted
less than two minutes before it appeared. Thanks to John Novak
webmaster http://www.eceti.org UFO Reports and Info Hotline:
(206) 528-5527

CALIFORNIA FLYING TRIANGLE

ALPINE -- On April 27, 2001, at about 11:00 PM I saw the
strangest thing while looking at the night sky. At first I
thought I saw a shooting star but the light didn't fade out nor
move in a downward motion. It flew in a horizontal movement
across the sky. Then I realized I'm looking at lit up side or a
reflecting side or edge of an object. My next reaction was that
I must have been seeing an owl gliding across the night sky
trying to rationalize this when I immediately realized this is
no owl. I could make out the sides of a 3-sided object dark as
the night sky itself but the sides were just barely visible. I
felt that rather then looking at just a dark object not lit up
that I felt it was camouflaged to the night sky. I don't know
how to explain that but that's a feeling that went through me.
My reaction in a split second was "how sneaky this thing is." I
want to say it was not lit, it seemed as black and void as the
night sky, but I was able to make out the 3 sides. I'm not !
sure if it was reflections or actual lights very dim that shown
its form, but I could make out its shape. No doubt though at
what I was seeing even as quick as it was I was able to get a
clear view and take it all in. It had a three sided guitar pick
shape. When it passed in front of the stars the shape was easy
to discern as it headed east. When it was out of sight I even
thought to hold my hand out in the sky to try to judge the size
it took up in the sky. When I held my hand out I would say that
it was the size of half of my hand size. This object was flying
at the height that helicopters from Miramar Base fly. There was
no sound and it moved at a tremendous speed. It flew directly
over my head and disappear past the mountains in the east 10
miles away in 5 seconds. ((Peter Davenport says he spoke with
this witness at length, and we found him to be exceptionally
eloquent, lucid. He provided a digital image at
http://www.ufocenter.com

SANTA BARBARA -- On May 14, 2001, I got up before dawn to go
out to my car parked on http://www.ufocenter.com Alta Vista
Road. At 4:30 AM, it was perfectly quiet and still outside and
I scanned the sky as I always do for UFOs. and I have done so
the past nine years with no results until today. I was facing
northeast, then looked up and just overhead and to my right I
saw a lumious spheroid shape, moderately bright, white and
yellowish-tinged, passing in a straight line from the Santa
Barbara Channel in the southeast, to the northeast towards
Bakersfield. It travelled in what seemed to be a course
crossing directly over the southern end of town. At first I had
to eliminate other possibilities: airplane, satellite,
meteorite, space station, etc. I felt that it was too low to be
in space and it was silent, so it couldn't be a plane of any
kind. Also the light itself was too round and uniform in shape,
and too yellowish in luminescence, from the point when it was
over my right sho! ulder to the time I watched it disappear over
the horizon of the mountains. A conventional space vehicle or
satellite would show bright white and gradually either brighten
or dim out as it crossed the terminator. This did neither. This
thing was just too big and yellow anyway and did not change
much in luminosity. It was just too big to be either a marker
light or a landing light of any kind and it was not on any
established airways. I estimate that it was at 30,000 feet give
or take a few thousand and the light was easily the size of an
airliner. I also rule out any natural phenomena such as
meteors. There was no flaming tail and no streaking. It was
just not that fast either. It cruised along at a fairly brisk
pace which I would estimate at a up to 300 hundred miles per
hour. But it was high enough for me to watch it for at least
two minutes. I noticed no fluctuations in its course, but it
did seem to fluctuate in speed and altitude slightly. I am
extremely careful about suc! h things and this is my first
report in nine years of sky-watching. I feel I have a good
sense of such objects from being a private pilot and having
spent four years in the Air Force. I have never seen anything
like it after nine years of deliberate skywatching. Thanks to
Don Robertso and Paul Walker pjw56@hotmail.com

ENGLAND DOME SHAPED UFO IN NORFOLK,

NORWICH -- On April 26, 2001, a silver dome shaped UFO with a
flat base was observed flying over Norfolk County in the
Eastern most area of England. The object changed shape at 6:45
PM. It glided slowly over changing shape into a teardrop the
speeded up as it was leaving. It was quite low and close, but
there were no details on its surface. Thanks to
http://www.ufocenter.com

THE FLIGHT OF DENNIS TITO INTO SPACE

Jeff Chalender writes, "Last week, something wonderful happened
in the world of spaceflight. For the first time ever, a
civilian who is not in the employ of any space agency bought a
ride on a spaceship. His name is Dennis Tito, 60 years old, a
self made millionaire, and former NASA employee. He spent a
quiet week aboard the International Space Station, peering out
the windows, taking snapshots, listening to opera CDs, and
helping the crew where he could. His son Michael Tito said,
"Africa is his favorite continent with it's spectacular red and
brown hues. What a thrill! Who wouldn't want to do this? My
father is pursuing his dream. He's obviously having the
experience of his life. He's sitting up there, looking out the
port hole, listening to opera music, and getting his money's
worth." In spite of disparaging comments on the whole thing,
and a negative attitude by NASA officials, Tito's Russian
shipmates, Commander Talgat Musabayev, and Flight Engineer Yuri
Barurin, who flew! with him from the Baikonur Cosmodrome aboard
the Soyuz TM-32, were satisfied that he is a good spaceman. "
is no nuisance, in fact, he is trying to help us. We have to
explain to him some things which cannot be learned on Earth as
we would do to any other novice Cosmonaut. But basically has
dealt smoothly with both crews." Said Musabayev.

NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin said last week:The current
situation has put an incredible stress on the men and women of
NASA. They are dedicated to safety, and Mr. Tito does not
realize the efforts of thousands of people in the United States
and Russia that are working to protect his safety and the
safety of everyone else, taking extraordinary means." NASA
official Thomas Stafford, who flew in the Gemini progrzm in the
1960s had this to say: "There is no question this will have an
impact on the activities up there. It should be made clear to
Mr. Tito that his activities are limited to the Russian
modules, due to his lack of adequate training on the US
modules. It is unfortunate that NASA must now take
risk-mitigating actions that will affect the productivity of
the ISS Expedition.&q Mr Tito, however, was denied training on
the US part of the station.by NASA. Mr. Tito has had eight full
months of rigorous Cosmonaut training in Russia that should not
to be taken lightly. Spea! king in his own defense, Mr. Tito
said last week's triple computer failure had caused a slow down
of the pace of work being done. He also pointed out that the US
modules were at least 330 feet away from where he was staying
in the Service, or Zvezda module. He expressed his disbelief
that his presence was interfering with the station program. He
even helped out in the galley, preparing meals for his
crewmates, freeing them for more important endeavors. Russian
official Viktor Blagov made this statement: Everyone is getting
on with their work and there have been no complaints from on
board. Tito's presence, according to our data, has in no way
harmed the work of either the permanent or visiting crew. There
has been some speculation in UFO circles that Mr. Tito may see,
and take pictures of, something hitherto unacknowledged in
space. Sadly, that is not likely to happen. Mr. Tito signed
papers putting himself under orders, effectively silencing him
from making any unapproved sta! tements when he returned to the
ground. He returned safely on May 6, 2001, paving the way for
the rest of us. Thank you Mr. Tito. Copyright 2001 Jeff
Challenger & Sunrise Multimedia

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challenger has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
were caught on recent Shuttle video footage. Jeff has over a
hour-long tape of UFOs shot in space. Jeff spends hundreds of
hours watching the shuttle broadcasts from space and is now an
expert on NASA missions and even those onboard the shuttle are
unlikely to see what Jeff does. Using Jeff's directions you
will be able to learn the difference between space junk, ice
crystals and real UFOs. One segment has 24 UFOs watching the
shuttle from space. I feel confident we could go into a court
of law and convince any jury, UFOs are moving around our Earth.
Send $25 to: Jeff Challenger 2768 Mended Way -Sacramento,
California 95833-2011.

THE UFO -- JESUS CONNECTION

David E. Twitted writes, "The ancient astronaut and Biblical
UFO hypotheses are not new. However, no one seems to want to
take the matter to the next logical step. If Ezekiel's, "wheel
within a wheel," and Moses', "pillar of fire and cloud,were
forerunners of today's UFOs, then the Star of Bethlehem and the
brilliant cloud to which Jesus ascended must be treated in the
same vein. When Biblical descriptions of anomalous aerial
phenomena are overlaid on that of modern-day UFO reports, the
picture seems to meld as one. Once the evidence has been
presented, the reader is led to a conclusion that is at best
convincing and at least thought provoking. Are you willing to
risk having your worldview shaken? Read the preface free at:
http://hometown.aol.com/fi4mufon/myhomepage/index.html To order
your copy of THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION, go to:
http://www.buybooksontheweb.com Or Save the shipping charges
and order your autographed copy by sending a check or money
order for $13.95 (US) per! copy to: David Twichell, P.O. Box
511, Trenton MI. 48183-0511

PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO photographs
available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy
Commander Graham Bethune. $10.00. Send check or money order to
G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055. CD OF
FILER'S FILES for the last four years 1997 through 2000 is
available for $25.00. Both for $30.00.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $30 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2001 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the
files on their Web Sites provided they credit the newsletter
and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. Caution: Most of these are initial reports and
require further investigation. These reports and comments are
not necessarily the official MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters
to Majorstar@Aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants
permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if
you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.


If you want to be removed form the list, you can unsubscribe
your email address from the same place you subcribed.
http://www.filersfiles.com/main.htm#subscribe







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 18

              Re: ncient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Anthony

From: Gary Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:04:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 18:13:50 -0400
Subject: Re: ncient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Anthony


 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists


 >Hello to All,

 >Whilst finishing a piece of writing on ancient Oriental
 >encounter reports I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion about the
 >discs allegedly found in 1938. I was very sceptical of the whole
 >thing until I saw Peter Krassa's photos of them a few years ago,
 >and now I'm only _sceptical_ (without the 'very'). Then there's
 >a book called 'Sungods in Exile' which I read so long ago that
 >all I can remember about it was my own grimace at having wasted
 >my pocket money on such an obvious bag of drivel. I no longer
 >have a copy of it, which is a shame as there's evidently some
 >weird link between all these matters.

Hi List and Chris,

I have several references for the Dropa discs from a literature
search I did about a year ago, when I get a spare moment I will
email you them. My interest in this story is from the viewpoint
of a current project to collect and have alleged alien semiotics
analysed. There is supposed to be a scientific paper somewhere
regarding the discs; but so far, I have not yet been able to
locate a copy, much less an English translation.

I too contacted several universities in China to discover what
else could be learned and tried to track down anyone who may
have been connected with this story, but the trail grows ever
cold. I have never seen a clear representation of the writing
which is supposed to be on the discs, so if anyone knows a
source I am interested? Recently the 'Ancient Astronanuts'
bunch had an article on their website with indistinct photo's
but alas they do not show the writing. Unfortunately, I cannot
elucidate much further what you already outline, other than to
state it is very difficult to penetrate the anecdotal nature of
this tale even though the enigmatic discs reputedly exist and
are caught on film. If anyone knows the current location of the
Dropa discs perhaps they can enlighten us?.

Suggestions or further information welcome.


Regards,

Gary Anthony








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                         Re: Talk And Action - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 22:30:58 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:51:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:12:15 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >>Alternatively, do the same with UFOs: The Best Evidence,
 >>compiled by Don Berliner; it is readily available in an
 >>inexpensive paperback edition. Or the University Press of Kansas
 >>book edited by David Jacobs, UFOs & Abductions: Challenging the
 >>Borders of Knowledge. The point is, send them a serious,
 >>fact-oriented, scholarly book, not one that spouts wild theories
 >>and pseudoscience.

 >>Who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

 >Dick,

 >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this had already been
 >done, or at least semi-done, with the Berliner book. Didn't
 >Rockefeller pay to have a thousand or so copies distributed to
 >Congressional staffers and other influential pols?

 >And then, of course, Greer appropriated it and tried to do it
 >all over again!

 >But, seriously... what, if any kind of response came from that
 >effort? Is there anything that's significantly changed the
 >political landscape since then?

 >If memory serves, Bigelow also paid to distribute over 100,000
 >copies of the flawed Roper Report to medical health officials.
 >What, if anything, came of that effort?

 >I hate to be overly cynical, but politicians are in business to
 >get reelected. Call for a Congressional investigation of UFOs?
 >You might as well shoot yourself in the head at close range with
 >a shotgun or take a permanent leave of absence, because you sure
 >as hell won't have a chamber seat the next time Congress
 >reconvenes.

 >Ain't gonna happen, unless there's some series of events to stir
 >the national pot, as happened the last time with the Michigan
 >Flap, when Gerald Ford was an influential congressman from
 >there.

 >The 50th anniversary of Roswell, with Steven Schiff pushing,
 >resulted in a GAO and Air Force investigation, but the wind is
 >now out of that sail, too. The Phoenix Lights flap never got
 >very far off the ground.

 >Only totally unpredictable events will drive action now,
 >especially in this climate. Senators and representatives are
 >swamped with stuff and suggestions from their consitutents. They
 >have large staffs in place precisely to weed out this sort of
 >stuff. Most of them probably don't have the time to read an
 >outside book about _anything_ because they're too busy raising
 >money for the next election. And money in UFOs there is not --
 >unless you can get everyone who listens to Art Bell to chip in a
 >dollar or two to a specific candidate. That might turn at least
 >one head, but his or hers better be a very influential one.

 >Of course, if the aliens would just abduct more Congress persons
 >we wouldn't have this problem. Any ideas as to how _that_ might
 >be arranged?

 >Maybe even that ploy wouldn't help. If I recall aright, the
 >Secretary General of the United Nations was once allegedly
 >abducted, and it didn't seem to motivate that organization much.

 >Don't forget how McDonald was treated by the House Committee
 >earlier. Do you think Budd or Dave would be treated any better
 >today? Hopkins, for one, would be flayed alive over "Witnessed."
 >It would not be a pretty sight on C-Span.

 >Again, just my cynical two cents...

 >Dennis

Dennis,

You might be amazed as to how much I agree with your "cynical"
appraisal of trying to get Congress to act, and my view is based
on having lived in and around Washington, D.C., for over 40
years, working for Congressional Information Service (12 years),
and interacting with lots of VIPs. Which is more than probably
98% of the people on this list can say. For an "outside the
Beltway" observer, you are well on target.

However, to the best of my knowledge Rockefeller did not target
Congress; the "Best Evidence" was targeted to news media moguls
and corporate chiefs; with (as far as I know) invisible
"results."

I totally agree with you that Congressional hearings are not in
the cards, unless outside events occur that force the issue. In
fact, I think Greer (if anything) succeeded in making hearings
even less likely than they may have been before.

But where are you coming from with this comment, since you don't
seem to think there is anything there worth investigating in the
first place?


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

              Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 18:50:29 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:53:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck


 >From: Gary Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:04:49 +0100


 >>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists


 >>Hello to All,

 >>Whilst finishing a piece of writing on ancient Oriental
 >>encounter reports I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion about
 >>the discs allegedly found in 1938. I was very sceptical of
 >>the whole thing until I saw Peter Krassa's photos of them a
 >>few years ago, and now I'm only _sceptical_ (without
 >>the 'very').

 >Hi List and Chris,

 >I have several references for the Dropa discs from a literature
 >search I did about a year ago, when I get a spare moment I will
 >email you them. My interest in this story is from the viewpoint
 >of a current project to collect and have alleged alien >semiotics analysed.

<snip>

 >I have never seen a clear representation of the writing
 >which is supposed to be on the discs, so if anyone knows a
 >source I am interested?

Hi Anthony, everyone,

Maybe the photos you've seen are actually the ones I've seen.
The objects look a lot like a PC's hard discs but as you say no
writing shows up on them in the photos. However, I do recall
that there were black and white photos of similarly weird discs
in the 'Sungods in Exile' book. There _are_ things inscribed
there.You could probably locate a copy in a library, an Oxfam
shop or from the garbage can outside either of these places. As
I no longer live in Old Blighty myself I won't be able to seek
one out.

Peter Krassa may be the leading expert on this right now.
Do you think we could contact him?


Chris Aubeck







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

               Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:10:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:54:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:59:45 -0300

 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >>on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >>was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >>UFOs.

 >>Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >>day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >>seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >>green men.

 >>Great job Nick!

 >Kelly,

 >Where have you been? I have been doing radio and TV interviews
 >about UFOs for more than 30 years, always coming on very
 >strongly (I am _not_ an apologist ufologist) and in more than
 >90% of the cases have been treated very fairly, openly,
 >respectfully.. or whatever positive words you want to use.


<snip>

Hi Stan,

In all honesty I fail to see what your resume has to do with the
little blurb I wrote on Nick's appearance on City TV.


Kelly








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:14:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:57:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 23:58:41 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:01:03 +1200

Robert, you answer William:

 >Regardless of what Corso claimed or said, the fact of the matter
 >was that storys about Russian putting everything from troops to
 >missiles in cuba were floating around before 1962. In fact some
 >of they started leaking out of the Cuban exile community after
 >the Bay of Pigs Fiasco in 61'.

Do you have proof for this statement? Have you read Col. Corso's
version of these events. Have you read 'The Day After Roswell'?


 >>William writes:
 >>Whether there were stories being circulated or not regarding
 >>anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba doesn't really make much
 >>difference. The point being that it seemed to Corso the same lid
 >>was clamped down on the nukes when the cannisters were
 >>discovered, in essence forcing his hand.

And you answer:
 >Corso wasn't in the "loop" when the pictures came back
 >showing the missile cannisters

And on what do you base this statement? Col. Corso was in the
"loop", as you say. If he wasn't in the "loop" then where was
he?

Then you write:

 >He saw the pictures along with everybody else after the crisis
 >started.

And where did you come up with this BS.

 >>As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
 >>did not identify Corso by name.

Yes he did William! See Birnes interview

Then Robert writes:

 >Here is the bottom line on Corso and his book. Corso himself
 >claimed that Birnes stroked the book and material was not
 >true/correct. Corso's own son has apprently claimed that about
 >10 percent of the book is "worthwhile" apparently meaning
 >correct. Obviously the son doesn't believe every word in the
 >book, nor does he consider it UFO scripture never to be doubted
 >or questioned.So in essence we have a book that
 >(being generous) anywhere up to 70-90 percent of the
 >book is a stroke job.

Robert, It sounds as if you know a thing or two about stroke
jobs, but I'd like to stop this bit of misinformation right here
and now. Last night I had an hour conversation with Col. Corso's
son, Phil. He was both cordial and informative and never once
seemed evasive or less than honest.

I asked him about the 10% quote and he said folks must have
misunderstood what he intended to say. He stated, (and I
paraphrase): Only ten percent of what my father had to say was
represented by the book. Yes, there were some mistakes but the
overall meat and potatoes of the book was absolutely true. My
father did exactly what he said he did concerning the alien
technology.

So there you have it. Phil Jr. endorses his father's beliefs
100%. "My father never exaggerated or swore."


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

              Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 00:24:07 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:58:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Easton


Regarding:

 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists

Chris wrote:

 >Whilst finishing a piece of writing on ancient Oriental
 >encounter reports I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion about the
 >discs allegedly found in 1938.

Chris,

There was some exceptional and informed material about the
'Dropa stones' mythology posted to 'UFO Skeptics' in March.

The following URL [which will wrap-around], is a useful starting
point for those discussions:

http://debunk.listbot.com/cgi-bin/subscriber?Act=view_archive&list_id=debunk&sta
rt_num=422


Alternatively, simply browse the list via:

http://debunk.listbot.com/

The first message in the thread is #401 and I'm sure you'll find
the overall content enlightening.


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

              Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:27:20 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 14:59:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists - Aubeck

 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ancient Discs & Mongolian Ufologists


 >Hello to All,

 >Whilst finishing a piece of writing on ancient Oriental
 >encounter reports I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion about
 >the discs allegedly found in 1938. I was very sceptical of the
 >whole thing until I saw Peter Krassa's photos of them a few
 >years ago, and now I'm only _sceptical_ (without the 'very').

Hello again,

I've discovered that author Hartwig Hausdorf has been
busy investigating the discs in question. He even gave
a lecture on the topic in Puerto Rico in 1997, claiming
he could prove it was all true. A transcript of his
lecture can be read at:

www.ovni.net/ufolib/hartwig.txt

Then I found a counter-attack against Hausdorf at

http://ufos.about.com/science/ufos/library/weekly/aa032601a.htm

These reports were not available when I last delved into these
matters, but still don't provide a definitive answer.

Thanks for the personal replies I've received already.


Chris Aubeck









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

             Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 22:12:10 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:06:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good! - Friedman


 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:33:29 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Disclosure Project - So Far So Good!
 >>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:07:07 -0300

 ><snip>

 >>Depending on grandiose personal claims, when there is so much
 >>solid data, is fighting the battle with both hands tied behind
 >>one's back. I haven't even talked about nuclear fusion rockets,
 >>abductions, the silly arguments of the SETI cultists, etc.

 >Define "cult"; explain how SETI qualifies as one; and prove your
 >assertion that not only is Frank Drake a "SETI cultist" but that
 >he essentially and intentionally and knowingly leads the other
 >"cultists" away from the truth. (You implied this in your bio
 >and talk decription for last year's Bay Area UFO Expo 2000.)


I discussed the notion of SETI (Silly Effort To Investigate)
Cultists in detail in my 1999 MUFON Paper 'Star Travel? YES' and
in some other places as well. The paper is in the proceedings of
the Symposium or available from me. Briefly, a cult is a group
with charismatic leadership, a very strong dogma, strong
resistance to outside criticism, and an exaggerated notion of
its own importance. Surely Sagan, Drake, Tartar, and Shostak
would be considered Charismatic. They hold to an irrational
dogma, namely that the universe is teaming with advanced
civilizations, some more advanced than we are and that there is
no colonization, no migration, no interstellar travel and no
evidence of visitations, and that radio is _the_ means of
interstellar communication.Of course, as with any cult's dogma,
no evidence is provided for any of these.

None of these make any sense in view of all the evidence that
Technological Progress comes from doing things differently in an
unpredictable way. The future is not an extrapolation of the
past. This applies in 2 relevant areas. Interstellar travel is
NOT impossible since chemical propulsion is clearly not the most
advanced technique (I have worked on fission and fusion
propulsion, for example), Radio, which we have had for roughly
100 years is hardly to be considered the ultimate in
communication technology. Only 37 light years away are two
sunlike stars, less than a light year apart from each other, and
about a billion years older than the sun.

The "scientific" literature from the cultists does not include
any systematic review or study of the scientific UFO literature.
Read Drake's co-authored book 'Are We Alone?'. He references
Howard Blum's 'Out There' one of the most inaccurate books
around. He insists no one is coming here, but doesn't reference
any of the scientific work on Interstellar travel. His research
is by proclamation not investigation. It is self-serving, but
hardly scientific.

Sagan, as I noted in TOP SECRET/MAJIC, has as his most
frequently cited source of UFO data, the tabloid 'Weekly World
News', but doesn't even mention such scientific sources as
'UFOs: A Scientific Debate', which he co-edited and which was
published by his University's Press. Many papers by scientists
including himself. He doesn't reference the 1968 Congressional
Symposium on UFOs, to which he (and I) was a contributor.

Shostak and Tartar are no better. All discuss not only
technology about which they know nothing, but also sociology ..
how aliens would act and how Earthlings would act,.about which
they seem to know even less.. not surprising considering their
backgrounds. All ignore national security considerations. They
sound like propagandists for their cause with very selective
choice of data. Krauss, author of the "Physics of Star Trek" is
also a cultist when it comes to the question of alien life, and
advanced technology.

They not only ignore the scientific UFO studies, but certainly
give the impression that anybody moving in that direction is
unscientific. Certainly a disincentive to research for the
beginner seeking their approval. They all indicate that radio
astronomers will make the greatest discovery in man's history
and they will serve mankind by acting as an intermediary between
aliens and Earth. Sorry, I don't think they have earned the
privilege any more than a ham radio operator speaks for the
country in which he happens to be located.

It is no wonder NASA stopped supporting the radiotelescope
search for alien life. It is a cultish notion. Great for job
security for radio astronomers.

There is a glimmer of light (pun intended) because Dr. Paul
Horowitz of Harvard and an Australian group have begun an
optical SETI program, since we Earthlings are already able to
make very powerful laser pulses observable from other solar
systems.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                           Re: Ravenna 1966 - 1966

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 04:23:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:08:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - 1966


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:08:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 01:25:00 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>To a skeptical mind if a witness described a "glowing, disk
 >>shaped UFO that had the brightness of a meteor.." it translates
 >>out to "blah blah blah blah blah blah meteor blah blah.
 >>Naturally the skeptical mind would instantly label the case as a
 >>meteor.

 >>In this particular case we ignore everything except for "bright
 >>point of light" and naturally Venus comes to mind.

 >Yes, because Venus was at that very moment a bright point of
 >light in the Eastern sky in the direction that the two hour chase
 >occurred. And the object disappeared with dawn. Also, the
 >witnesses didn't report another bright light, Venus, in the same
 >direction.

 >>Pretty simple being a skeptic isn't it..... :)

 >It is, if one doesn't automatically jump to the conclusion,
 >first, that a flying saucer must have been involved just because
 >a witness described the visual appearance of Venus as a "disk".

 >Assume that Venus is some sort of object with a shape, squint at
 >it closely, be sure that your eyeglasses are on, and clean, and
 >that your car's windshield is spotless, and then try to figure
 >out what that shape is. Anyone with slight astigmatism will see
 >an oval shape. Anybody else will also see beams of light caused
 >by one's eyelashes, moving back and forth as one moves one's
 >head.

 >Happens all the time. How else would we have all of those Venus
 >IFOs?


Hello Bob:

As my eyes age, I can relate to that. One of them definitely has
gained (lost) some focal length with respect to the other for
example.

Working nights at times, I will step out for a smoke and look
into the sky. Venus was really brilliant one night, don't ask me
when, but I knew it was Venus .. right on schedule and right on
the expected coordinates.

I said to myself: " .. pretend you don't know about Venus, but
just heard something about flying saucers."

Then, squinting and peeking, one eye at a time and then both, I
looked at Venus again. It took on a distinctly ovoid shape, and
even maneuvered left and right a little. For a second there I
was a real (pretend) UFO witness!

That's one big reason I no longer list night-lights in my
database. I need not elaborate, Hynek was right. I think
he said something like:
" Night-light reports are virtually useless."

This says nothing about the more interesting sightings, those of
structured objects seen reasonably close by. Just maybe, someday
I might see something worth writing about. Until then, I can
only draw on the descriptions of others.

Is there anyone on this list who has _not_ seen the Grand Canyon
in Arizona? If so, what do you make of the descriptions given by
others who have?

How about those who heard descriptions of the G.C. first, and
only later saw it for themselves? How would you compare the
earlier descriptions to the actual canyon in front of you?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:23:53 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:12:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:34:21 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:00:19 EDT
 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >
 >>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 02:03:22 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 21:23:15 -0500

 >>><snip>

 >>>Dennis wrote:

 >>>>More to the point, I was under the recent assumption that the
 >>>>Connors and Hall semi-bio of Ruppelt had Ruppelt & the AF
 >>>>denying Menzel access to classified Blue Book files because
 >>>>Menzel didn't have the necessary security clearance(s) that
 >>>>would allow him access to same. (Don't make me look up the pages
 >>>>- that should be your job.)

 >>>>Pretty interesting, assuming that Menzel was supposed to be a
 >>>>leading figure within MJ-12. How do you square Ruppelt's account
 >>>>with yours?

 >>>Just because you have a "Top Secret" security clearance does
 >>>_not_ mean you instantly have access to any/all information that
 >>>is "Top Secret." You have to have a demonstrated need to know.
 >>>In other words you could have a code word security clearance
 >>>with the National Security Agency and be denied access to Air
 >>>Force documents or Dept of Defense documents at a lesser
 >>>classification level.

 >>>The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >>>system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >>>have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >>>access to AF UFO files.

 >>I must step in here and side with Dennis on this issue.

 >>The Blue Book files did not have codeword access controls. More
 >>importantly, according to the (fraudulent) MJ-12 Eisenhower
 >>Briefing Document, Blue Book had liaison with the MJ-12
 >>Committee and Menzel is named as a member.

Sorry, Brad, you are doing research by proclamation. Just how
much of the material of Ruppelt's that you saw was TOP SECRET?
If there was any, how do you know that is all there was?
Remember the FBI memo of January 31, 1949... speaking of flying
saucers "This matter is considered top secret by Intelligence
Officers of both the Army and the Air Forces." So where is all
the TS material?

Note the 1962 memo from FTD to TD-G (Colonel Carlisle) item 3.b.
"Discontinuance of the UFO project would not result in the loss
of valuable information. For those incidents which may be
significant other than as UFO sightings, reports are made to
other Air Force elements through channels completely independent
for (sic) those spelled out for UFO reports".

Note the memo from USAF General Carroll Bolender Oct. 20, 1969
"Moreover, reports of unidentified flying objects which could
affect national security are made in accordance with JANAP 146
or Air Force Manual 55-11, and are not part of the Blue Book
System"

 >To our knowledge there was no codeword access controls on
 >Bluebook. If such a liason existed, the person doing the liason
 >would have to hold a clearance compatabile with that group
 >(MJ-12) or organization. Just because they had such a clearance
 >and or sat in on meetings doesn't mean that they could wholesale
 >transfer files and documents that were properly AF classified to
 >an outside group or organization.

 >The point being is just because Bluebook was a very public
 >program does not preclude the possibility that a highly
 >classified program was also doing UFO work and working along
 >with and or using Bluebook.

 >I would point out (just about the time the wolves are howling)
 >that I am not saying that MJ-12 is real or that the EBD is real.

Who cares about wolves? I am saying the EBD and MJ-12 are real
and have presented relevant data in a book and a number of
papers. I find that the MJ-12 debunkers haven't done their
homework..for example, see my response in the March,2001, Mufon
Journal.

I would suspect that it was Menzel's assignment from MJ-12 to do
a book debunking UFOs. Keyhoe and others were gaining support.
Menzel had written science fiction and popular science articles.
His word as a prominent astronomer would certainly go a long way
to quell interest. It certainly did, as has been noted on this
list. Some people have acted as if there were no disinformation
programs.

Re. access to other programs, when I was working on radiation
shielding for Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion systems, I had a Q
clearance giving me access to documents rated Secret Restricted
Data. Unfortunately, I was denied access to SRD radiation
shielding documents put out by Admiral Rickover's Nuclear Navy
people because they wouldn't give me a need-to-know.My clearance
level was OK, but.....

Colonel Madsen, who headed the crash test dummy program, told me
that when at WPAFB he was doing compartmentalized work on the
U-2. His boss didn't have access to his work.

 >Many years ago when the CIA first started the photo recce sat
 >program. The very public side, for public consumption allegedly
 >involved shooting monkeys and what not into space. The very
 >public side was called "Discovery" and had a full compliment of
 >scientists and engineers who ran the program, did their thing
 >and so on.

 >The classified side was called "Corona" and the classification
 >was Keyhole. The classified side was worked by various
 >scientists and engineers doing their project on the black side
 >of the program.

 >Interestingly the _only_ person on the public side of the
 >program that knew the actual purpose and was cleared to the
 >highly classified side was not the Discovery program director or
 >his sub managers but a secretary who worked in the office.
 >Everybody else from the director of the public side down was not
 >told or informed. In essence the secretary was the "liason"
 >between the two programs.

 >>Therefore, with liaison between Blue Book and MJ-12 there is no
 >>possibility whatsoever that an MJ-12 member - if MJ-12 really
 >>existed as claimed in the (fraudulent) EBD - could not gain
 >>access to BB documents which were not compartmented or
 >>access-controlled.

...only by revealing his special access compartmented clearances
which he could not do. He didn't mention his Navy TS+ clearance
at the Loyalty hearings trying to take away a secret AF
clearance.

 >Just because a person (such as Menzel) holds a code word
 >clearance with the National Security Agency doesn't entitle him
 >to look at AF or DOD classified documents even though they may
 >be part of the same program. _If_ Menzel was a member of MJ-12
 >besides his MJ-12 clearance he would also need to have Air Force
 >Secret and Top Secret clearances plus the need to know to see
 >Bluebook files. Bottom line is just because you are a member of
 >MJ-12 would not instantly entitle you to access to AF files,
 >likewise if you had an AF S or TS clearance would not instantly
 >entitle you to a S or TS document generated by MJ-12.

 >>The fact that Menzel had to use subterfuge to get copies of BB
 >>files for his Flying saucers book because Ruppelt blocked his
 >>access is proof that Menzel was not a member of the MJ-12
 >>described in the EBD.

Hardly. He had a job to do, there were restrictions. He had to
get around them. No doubt he was devious and greedy,

 >All it is proof of is that Menzel was not properly cleared
 >through AF security channels and lacked a need to know or see
 >Bluebook files. There are many people in government who hold
 >security clearances who work for one organization and are not
 >allowed to see/view files generated by another
 >group/organization even though they may be working on the same
 >project.

 >I also have no doubt that if Menzel had requested copies of
 >files through the liason channel he would have had to justify
 >the request through our theoritical MJ-12 channels. Imagine this
 >request: "Gee fellas, could you use the official liason channel
 >and get me copies of files so I can use them for my book I am
 >writing....."

It is interesting to note that, whereas Federal Judge Gerhart A.
Gesell was given a special TS+ clearance in 1980 to see the NSA
Affidavit justifying witholding of 156 UFO documents, he was NOT
given access to any of the TS+ UFO documents.....


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                                UFO Book Sale

From: royjhale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 13:41:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:13:49 -0400
Subject: UFO Book Sale


Dear Colleagues,

Nick Redfern is selling his UFO book collection. I have arranged
with Nick to have his sale displayed on my site. If you are
interested in purchasing any of his books, I attach the link to
my web site:

http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/nicksbooks.html

Please note: Nick will also be selling his Magazine collection,
which will be uploaded soon, once this happens you will be
informed.

Please can you use the contact details for Nick, which are on
the web site.


Thank you, and best regards to you all,

Roy Hale

Editor: Down To Earth Magazine On The Net
http://www.thelosthaven.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

               Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - [burp]

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 06:04:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:15:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - [burp]


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >UFOs.

 >Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >green men.


Hello Kelly:

Amazing. One whole broadcast without a single mention of the
"little green men" which were never credibly reported in the
first place.

How long did it take? Half a century?

Still amazing, even for Canada with its high broadcasting
standards.


Best

- Larry Hatch

PS: One talk show host even interviewed Larry Hatch, (that's me
believe it or not) while the States were booming with Art Bell
types. Testimony no doubt to their high lasagna and good taste

[burp]

I hope I wasn't a complete bore.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                      Astrobiology: The Search For ETI

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 10:16:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:20:02 -0400
Subject: Astrobiology: The Search For ETI


ASTROBIOLOGY: ON THE SEARCH FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE

[from Science Week, 12 May 2001]

2. ASTROBIOLOGY: ON THE SEARCH FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE
Nearly 30 years ago, Carl Sagan (1934-1996) wrote the following:
"Civilizations hundreds or thousands or millions of years beyond
us should have sciences and technologies so far beyond our
present capabilities as to be indistinguishable from magic. It
is not that what they can do violates the laws of physics; it is
that we will not understand how they are able to use the laws of
physics to do what they do. It is possible that we are so
backward and so uninteresting to such civilizations as not to be
worthy of contact, or at least of much contact. There may be a
few specialists in primitive planetary societies who receive
master's or doctor's degrees in studying Earth or listening to
our raspy radio and television traffic. There may be amateurs --
Boy Scouts, radio hams, and the equivalent -- who may be
interested in developments on Earth. But a civilization a
million years in our future is unlikely, I believe, to be very
interested in us. There are all those other civilizations a
million years in our future for them to talk to." [*Note #1] ...
... T.L. Wilson (Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy, Bonn,
DE) presents a review of some current considerations concerning
the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, the author making
the following points:

1) The author points out that N.S. Kardashev, in 1964,
classified possible extraterrestrial civilizations according to
the energy at their disposal, the scheme permitting a
determination of whether, in a context of communication, we
would be dealing with a civilization like our own (type I), a
rather advanced civilization (type II), or a vastly more
advanced civilization (type III). The transmission power of a
type I civilization is equal to the power expendable by all the
technological activity on Earth. For a specific direction, this
can be achieved by coupling the output of a 1 megawatt
transmitter operating at 10 centimeters to a 100-meter-diameter
telescope. The transmission power of a type II civilization is
the entire output of the Sun, which is equal to 10^(14) times a
type I transmission. The transmission power of a type III
civilization is equal to the power from our entire Galaxy, or
10^(11) times a type II signal.

2) The author points out that humanity has sufficient resources
at present to broadcast messages comparable to a type I
civilization in a specific direction, although in practice the
types of transmission are based on isotropic radiators. A type
II transmission might be transmitted by an extraterrestrial
civilization that had captured all of the power from its central
star. Such extraterrestrial civilizations are often referred to
as "Dyson civilizations". Type III civilizations have captured
the power of an entire galaxy.

3) The author points out that F.D. Drake, in 1965, proposed what
is now called the "Drake equation" as an attempt to quantify
estimates of the number of extraterrestrial civilizations. The
equation takes the form N = RanbcdL, where (N) is the number of
extraterrestrial civilizations in a galaxy communicating at any
given time, (R) is the average rate of galactic star formation,

(a) is the fraction of stars accompanied by planets, (n) is the
number of planets per star system with conditions needed to
support life,

(b) is the fraction of habitable planets on which life actually
arises,

(c) is the fraction of the life-bearing planets that develop
intelligent life, (

d) is the fraction of intelligent species that develop
communication technologies, and (L) is the "life-span" of the
communicating technological culture.

4) The author points out that stars are concentrated in
galaxies, and there are more than 20 galaxies within 3 million
light years of our own Galaxy. In principle, we should be able
to receive a message from type II or type III extraterrestrial
civilizations in any of these galaxies with technology currently
available. With an average of 10^(10) Sun-like stars per galaxy,
we could detect messages from extraterrestrial civilizations
even if the product of the last 5 terms in the Drake equation
were less than 1 part in 10^(8). The author suggests these
considerations provide a rationale for all-sky untargeted
searches: With the possibility of at least modest numbers of
perhaps readily detectable extraterrestrial civilizations
(especially of type II or type III), the extra sensitivity
conferred by targeted searches would not be an absolute
requirement for success. However, the fact remains that no
confirmed transmissions in the centimeter-wavelength range have
been received, from which it has been claimed that type II and
type III extraterrestrial civilizations do not exist at the
present epoch. The author suggests this claim is overstated: it
may be valid for a sizeable part of our Galaxy, but only if the
extraterrestrial civilizations are broadcasting in the
centimeter-wavelength range without interruption -- and if they
wish their signals to be detectable.

5) The author points out that there is an advantage in
transmitting signals at short wavelengths, and this explains the
interest in optical searches for extraterrestrial intelligence.
The author suggests the following example illustrates the
advantages of optical searches in regard to effective radiated
power: An extraterrestrial civilization orbiting a Sun-like star
could use a laser to illuminate a 1-meter optical telescope
through narrow-band optical filters. The extraterrestrial
civilization could then produce a short pulse lasting 1
microsecond or less, and this would produce a flash 300,000
times as bright as their Sun. Even without optical filtering,
the flash would still be 30 times as bright as their Sun, and
this factor would rise to 3000 if the diameter of the telescope
were increased to 10 meters (the diameter of our current Keck
telescopes). Because of the short pulse length, such optical
signals would not be found in conventional optical astronomical
surveys.

6) The author points out that if extraterrestrial civilizations
exist, they are not making their presence obvious. This in
itself suggests that type III and perhaps type II civilizations
are at best extremely rare. There are, however, many possible
reasons why we have not made contact with extraterrestrial
civilizations:

a) They may simply be very few.

b) There may be a number of extraterrestrial civilizations, but
these may be sending messages in optical or near-infrared ranges
that we have to explore comprehensively.

c) There may be extraterrestrial civilizations, but these may
not be interested in communicating and choose to keep themselves
hidden. This is more speculative, since it depends on the
cultural aspects of extraterrestrial civilizations. From
searches so far, the lack of contact demonstrates that
transmissions, if any, involve weak or intermittent signals (or
both).

7) The author suggests there seems to be no hope for
faster-than-light travel, so actual visits from extraterrestrial
civilization are unlikely. Even with the most efficient
propulsion systems, the energy needed to reach stars at 10 light
years in 20 years would be the equivalent of the present world
consumption for 1000 years. Such expenditure of energy would
hardly deter a type III extraterrestrial civilization, but even
then, broadcasts make more energetic sense than personal
appearances. There have been suggestions that extraterrestrial
civilizations might populate space with self-replicating
machines in space probes. This would allow colonization of large
regions of space in relatively short intervals of time, but it
seems vastly more complex than communicating by means of
electromagnetic radiation.

-----------
T.L. Wilson: The search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
(Nature 22 Feb 01 409:1110)
QY: T.L. Wilson: twilson@as.arizona.edu
-----------
Text Notes:
... ... *Note #1: Carl Sagan: _The Cosmic Connection: An
Extraterrestrial Perspective_, Doubleday, New York 1973, Dell,
New York 1975, p.222.
-------------------
Summary by SCIENCE-WEEK http://scienceweek.com 11May01
For more information: http://scienceweek.com/swfr.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

               Re: N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947 - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 07:53:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:21:45 -0400
Subject: Re: N.Y Times - Wednesday, July 9, 1947 - Hatch


 >From UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >OCR-ed by ebk from a .jpg at Jeff Rense's site:

 >http://sightings.com/general10/historic.htm

 >New York Times
 >Wednesday, July 9, 1947

 >Page 1 - Lead Story

 >'Disk' Near Bomb Test Site
 >Is Just a Weather Balloon

 >Warrant Officer Solves a Puzzle That Baffled His Superiors -
 >'Flying Saucer' Tales Pour in From Round the World

 >By MURRAY SCHUMACH


Dear EBK:

Thank you very much for OCRing this interesting article.

Its about time somebody came up with a sensible explanation for
all this silly guff.


Yours Truly

Harwood Snick,  BC  ( credentials on file.)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                      Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:10:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:26:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:08:42 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:23:12 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 >>>Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:53:06 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Case 10 of the "Twelve Good Unknowns" reported in Project Blue
 >>>Book Special Report #14 was an "enigma wrapped in a mystery"
 >>>until I investigated the Blue Book microfilm file at the
 >>>National Archives and (finally!) found the original data
 >>>(witness interviews). Now the case is "merely" an enigma.

<snip>

 >>Hello Bruce:

 >>I got a 404 error from FreeServers when I clicked on the URL
 >>below. Didya leave out some Dubyas or lasagnas or something?

 >>Here's the error message, slightly edited:

 >>"404 Error - File Not Found
 >>The page or file you are looking for
 >>http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.

 >HJmmmm... it worked for me.

 >Try simply:

 >http://brumac.8k.com

 >or

 >www.brumac.8k.com

 >and read down the opening page until you find reference to Case
 >10 (the first listed sighting on the web page) and click on
 >Rogue River.

 >Should work.

- - - - - -

Hello Bruce:

I finally got onto your pages. The site looks very nice, but
when I tried to input my personal observations, I got some
feedback indicating further problems.

I really like the Maccabee photo however, it shows what a master
of photography you truly are! You almost look like you don't
need a rug.


Best wishes from former musician:

- Larry Hatch


PS: It must me a matter of tricks with light and shadows.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

              Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 12:15:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:31:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 08:13:09 -0400


 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'

 >Reading UFO UpDates is not only interesting it is educational. I
 >enjoy many of the exchanges and information.

 >There are also elements which test you. One just has to un-learn
 >many things one learned in school.

 >For example:

 >1. "Guilt by association" is not a logical fallacy. Thanks,
 >James, I had always had the opposite impression.

<snip>

 >Please note another good example of this factor is Venus fades
 >in the morning, Spaur's UFO disappeared in the morning,
 >therefore Spaur's UFO was Venus. QED.

 >Pesky details like the officers were outside their vehicle and
 >observed the UFO moving and casting a shadow on the ground,
 >should probably be ignored. Also, the fact that the officers
 >identified the moon, Venus and the UFO all at the same time
 >should also be ignored. That other officers observed the UFO go
 >by followed by Spaur should also be ignored. Why? Because one
 >data point in the report matches another data point in the
 >explanation. That is all that is required.

The First Rule of Debunking is "Any explanation is better than
none." And how dop you get an explanation? You match the
characteristics described in the report with the characteristics
of a known phenomenon.

MACCABEE'S RULE FOR DUISCOVERING DEBUNKING:

When you observe that an identification is based on one or two
similar characteristics (between the reported phenomenon and the
Candidate Explanatory Phenomenon - CEP ) while other important
reported characteristics are ignored without an explanation for
why they can be ignored, then you have a Debunking Explanation
(DE).

Jan was referring to the Ravenna 1966 chase case here. The much
more recent Japan Airlines Case (mentioned at the Greer
Disclosure Conference) features the explanation offered by
Phunny Phil, Mars and Jupiter. Why? Evidently a combination of
two reasons:

1)The objects reported were in the sky ahead of the aircraft and
the CEP (Mars and Jupiter) were ALSO in the sky (nearly) ahead
of the aircraft ,

and

2) True UFOs (TRUFOs... which might be Extraterrestrial Vehicles)
do not exist,

3)Therefore, assuming the witnesses weren;'t lying, but saw
saomething, then they must have seen MArs and Jupiter.

(In further support of the Debunker Argument we often find the
question, not necessarily rhetorical (could demand an answer),
"Well if the UFOs were there and the non-UFOs were there too,
why didn't they report seeing the non-UFOs (in this case Mars
and Jupiter)?

(One response is... the witnesses didn't give a damn about the
non-UFOs, which weren't doing anything unusual, and gave their
full attention to the UFO[s]).

Note that the Mars and Jupiter explanation based on MArs and
Jupiter being in the sky and hence potentially visible to the
air crew is the justification for the explanation. However,
"numerous" other details of the observation were ignored, such
as the report that the unidentified objects first appeared one
above the other and then a few minutes later reoriented to one
beside the other. Even the most severe skeptic would agree (I
think) that Mars and Jupiter would have a "tough time" doing
this in a couple of minutes.

More recently we have had large debates over the Kenneth Arnold
sighting, for which CEP = pelicans. Why?

1)pelicans can fly fast (50 mph top speed)

2) pelicans can fly high (10,000 ft or more)

3 pelicans are white or whitish and therefore can appear bright
in the sunlight

4) pelicans can fly in groups (including 9 at a time)

5) pelicans fly in nonuniform lines sometimes (in "reverse
echelon")

These reasons characteristics of pelicans are not only
"necessary" but also "sufficient" to prove that Arnold saw
pelicans, providing one more idea is brought into the discussion

6) There is no evidence of TRue UFOs (all other reports
discarded) and hence it is more likely that Arnold saw pelicans
than that he saw ET craft.

ERGO: Arnold saw pelicans (after all, just ask the ornithologists).

This is a 'Rare' case in which claimed identification is based
on several characteristics in the report , not just one.

However:

Ignored in this argument is Arnold's claim that the objects were
far away (attributed to an error in observation on Arnold's
part), that the reflections were bright like sun reflected from
a mirror and that there is no dynamic arrangement between
pelicans and ARnold's flight path (no "map of the encounter")
that would explain why Arnold failed to either recognize the
pelicans or else got so far ahead (east ) of them that he never
got close enough (but then he wouldn't see them fly "past:" Mt.
Adams.) ("draw a map")

<snip>

 >15. Circular reasoning is a virtue. There are no reliable UFO
 >witnesses because reliable people would not report UFOs.

The utlimate resort of the skeptic/debunker?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:42:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:34:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:47:11 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >I apparently missed the point of your query above.

An interesting bit of back-pedalling - what was it that prompted
you change your tone of response? ;-)

 >Document Title: JP 3-50.3 Joint Doctrine for Evasion
 >and Recovery

Thanks - I've downloaded the .PDF, and its quite an interesting
document in it own right.

 >The one-page summary merely says that JP 3-50.5
 >replaces/supercedes AFM 200-3 and some other documents.

Actually, the search engine at:

http://searchpdf.adobe.com/

looks very useful - it seems to be able to turn up quite a few
of the "official" documents that are littered around the web.


David G Bolton

<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton

From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:42:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:37:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Bolton


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:43:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >Somewhere I read that AF Manual 200-3 with its saucer
 >illustration is from 1954 and is loosely based on the
 >AVRO saucer project designs.

Thanks Brad. '54 seems a reasonable date, given the type of
aircraft also on the illustration (although I'm no great plane
spotter - so don't know what make/model it represents).

As for the saucers being based on the AVRO designs, I supose it
depends on what level of security surrounded the AVRO projects
at the time. Is it reasonable to assume that photos of the
Avrocar would have been seen by an Air Force graphic
artist/illustrator in 1954?

I don't think that this would have been neccessary, though, as
Flying Saucer images were already part of the sc-fi culture -
and had been for some time - so it would have been fairly
natural, in a jokey way, to use the saucer image to represent
"advanced technology".

Incidentally, if you've not seen it, look at the 1929 example
at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/arnold/wonder.jpg

In fact, basing an illustration on a real "advanced project"
would have probably been forbidden. Imagine a similar document
being published in 1975 with the Lockheed "Have Blue" pictured
as the "advanced craft" - it would have caused heart failure
amongst the Air Force top brass!


David G Bolton

<David@Bolton.SOL.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

               Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire - Bolton

From: David Boltona <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:02:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:40:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire - Bolton


 >From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:14:49 +0100
 >Subject: Mystery Sonic Boom Rocks Yorkshire

 >Scarborough Evening News (North Yorkshire)
 >17 May 2001
 >BOOM MYSTERY AS PLANE AND A QUAKE RULED OUT

 >RAF investigators deny military aircraft was responsible for
 >the apparent sonic boom which rocked Scarborough in February.

What bloody use are all the tracking stations - if they can't
track and confirm/deny that a large meteor entered the
atmosphere over the North Sea? Then what chance have they got
trying to track an incoming ICBM?


David G Bolton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                       Wernher von Braun & Team, Photo

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 10:03:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:46:33 -0400
Subject: Wernher von Braun & Team, Photo


 >From: Don Ecker <decker@ufomag.com>
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:28:52 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Project Disclosure & Greer

 >My Look at Project Disclosure

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

WERNHER VON BRAUN & TEAM, PHOTO

Don,

Thanks for the opportunity to use an email message you wrote for
the UFO UpDates List, and post it as a news item at the Electric
Warrior Website.

The Disclosure Project has focused plenty of attention on the
question of UFOs and ETI, and I think the UFO community enjoys
hearing from a Viet Nam veteran, and UFO research veteran like
you.

You've dealt with some difficult topics regarding warfare, and I
sincerely appreciate it. Any time soldiers go to war, family
members inevitably wind up going to funerals. You handled this
well.

You wrote:

 >Ask any Pole or Hungarian or Austrian what they thought
 >about the Soviet Union. Well, anyone who lived through it
 >of course.

Well said. It so happens my parents somehow managed to live
through Hitler's Nazi invasion in Austria, something you also
alluded to. Hitler gave those nations are hard time too.

I can't imagine what it must have been like to be a Grade School
or High School kid, when WW II rolled into town, can you?

As my parents, and most people, tell it, _nobody_ really liked
Hitler or the Nazis. Of course, they had to go along with a lot
of bullshit, or get into deep trouble, maybe get killed.
Remember, we're talking about kids, facing a bad situation.

What's the point? I dug up and old photograph of Wernher von
Braun and Team in the US, to go along with your article. I
wanted to explain that I slightly altered this image, which is
clearly labeled "Retouch".

http://www.electricwarrior.com/img/VonBraun.jpg

This is one of those classic photographs that get passed around
and gossiped about in the UFO community. There is a sign, which
reads "Billy the Kid Curio Shop". The words came up nicely in
this retouch.

The sign is supposed to be shaped somewhat like a UFO, and
that's one reason why this image is so notorious. The other
reason is that it usually has a swastika in it, between the
words 'curio' and 'shop'. Get real! In the United States?

There is no end to speculation and arguments about how that
swastika got in there. I wanted to make it very clear that I
air-brushed it _out_, because it seems to me that somebody else
hoaxed it _in_ somewhere along the line. Maybe somebody on this
List knows the 'Real Story, but in my opinion it doesn't belong
in there.

Yes, I know all about the historical use of this symbol by other
cultures, and I'm not prepared to go into it here. Go read
something by Joe Campbell.

So to summarize, I'm the guy that air-brushed the swastika out
this version of that Von Braun image, for the EW Website, and
you and the rest of the UFO community can "blame" me for that
one, OK?

Actually, I didn't think anyone would really mind. We have to
take our lessons from the past, assess how we'd like to do
things better in the future, then move on.

There is every reason for people to maintain a state of
readiness, or cultivate the Martial Arts and know how to assume
a Self Defense Stance. I think that's what you were writing
about, with respect to the UFO/ETI phenomenon.


-eWarrior

------------------------------------------------------------
Anybody who wants to read Don Ecker's hard-as-nails email
assessment of the Disclosure Project can read it here...

http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews0022.htm

or here...

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m11-033.shtml









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                Eras News: 05-19-01 - NASA's Cydonia Response

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 10:06:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:49:45 -0400
Subject: Eras News: 05-19-01 - NASA's Cydonia Response


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

May 19, 2001

____________________________



NASA RESPONDS TO FACETS REQUEST REGARDING CYDONIA


The text of NASA's response follows below. It is interesting to
note the new stereoscopic Face images referred to, taken just
last April 8 and released April 19. So where are they? They have
apparently not been posted yet to the MSSS web site, or if they
have been, no one has been able to find them yet. Usually,
newly-released images are prominently referred to. Also,
regarding Arthur C. Clarke's recent statements on possible
'large-scale life forms' (vegetation) being seen in some of the
recent MGS photos, these statements have been in the public
domain and easily accessible for a number of weeks now:

Clarke's Believe it or Not

http://www.space.com/peopleinterviews/clarke_believe_010227.html


Arthur C. Clarke - How I helped to Save Star Trek: It Turned Out
to Forecast our Future

http://www.times-archive.co.uk/news/pages/tim/2000/09/16/timopnope01001.html


More Arthur C. Clarke Comments Regarding 'Vegetation on Mars'

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_251806,00.htm
l




National Aeronautics and
Space Administration

Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546-0001

May 11, 2001

Mr. Peter A. Gersten
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 2443
Sedona, AZ 86339


Dear Mr. Gersten:

In response to your letter to NASA Administrator Daniel S.
Goldin dated March 16, 2001, from the Formal Action Committee
for Extra-Terrestrial Studies (FACETS), NASA has fully and
openly distributed by means of public web-sites all images
obtained of the Cydonia 'face' feature under question. To date,
more than 90,000 images of Mars have been acquired by the Mars
Global Surveyor (MGS) Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC), as well as
hundreds of millions of laser altimeter topographic measurements
and infrared spectra. None of the images acquired to date by the
MGS/MOC system have been withheld and indeed, several recently
(April 8, 2001) acquired images, including stereoscopic coverage
of the Cydonia feature under question, have been released via
multiple public web sites. In this case, NASA responded to the
request by FACETS (presented in the letter by Peter Gersten to
Mr. Goldin on March 16, 2001) by initiating a complex set of MGS
spacecraft operations to ensure that the highest possible
resolution images of the Cydonia 'face' feature were acquired.
These spacecraft operations require special care and only a few
can be performed each day. In addition to 1.5 m per pixel (about
5 foot resolution) resolution images of the Cydonia feature,
NASA released a stereo 'anaglyph' of the feature that allows a
viewer with colored 3D glasses to view the feature in 3D. This
is the first release of a 3D image of any features on Mars
acquired in this resolution. Furthermore, NASA has assembled
public web site access of ALL MGS images acquired of the Cydonia
Face feature since the start of MGS scientific observations.
Given the challenges of imaging any feature on Mars (ie., NASA
has yet to find the second Viking Lander specifically), this has
involved considerable effort.

The newly released Cydonia observations reveal an intriguing
mesa-like feature not unlike those found in the Southwestern
USA, with geologic features than can be attributed to processes
in multiple places on Mars in which isolated topographic
features (remnants) have been observed. NASA encourages the
development of multiple working hypothesis models for the
formation of such features and in this case the new observations
have been publicly released to permit further debate about
controversial and enigmatic landforms on Mars. Dr. Michael
Malin, the Principal Investigator of the MGS Mars Orbiter
Camera, has provided his experienced interpretation of the new
images, but NASA welcomes additional opinions. Indeed, NASA
promotes innovative analysis of such spacecraft data by
competitive peer-review, as well as via open discussion in
public meetings and by all members of the interested-public.

In the letter to Mr. Goldin by the members of FACETS, there are
statements that are not consistent with published (and hence
peer-reviewed) results from scientific literature. NASA does not
know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest
pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of
like on Mars, nor are there any in the extant, peer-reviewed
literature. NASA favors exploring the Universe for evidence of
biological processes and aspects of the newly restructured Mars
Exploration Program support a variety of approaches for
searching for evidence of biological processes on Mars.

NASA has responded to the requests of the FACETS group in
exactly the fashion requested in the March 16 letter, by
targeting the Cydonia feature under question will (sic) the
highest possible resolution, and most optimized illumination, as
well as in stereo, to make available observations to the general
public in a responsive manner. These data are released and
available for interpretation by the FACETS members. They were so
recently acquired from the MGS that there may have appeared to
have been a delay in their release, but this was not the case.
When an image is acquired at Mars it must be relayed to Earth
via a specific process and then reconstructed on the ground
before it can be posted on a public web site. This was
accomplished at the end of last week (by April 19), and the data
released on that date.

Thus on the basis of the requests made in the March 16 letter
addressed to Mr. Goldin by Peter Gersten, the following items
have been met or exceeded as follows:

(1) all images of the Cydonia area have been released on the
internet (via http://www.msss.com and other public NASA sites
via JPL)

(2) stereoscopic, full resolution (1.5 m/pixel) MOC images were
acquired at optimized illumination conditions of the Cydonia
features and have been released via the internet

(3) NASA awaits a specific list of requests for targeting the
five additional areas of Mars from a list submitted by FACETS,
but no such list has yet been received.

NASA welcomes a variety of opinions about the origin of the
enigmatic features on Mars as observed by the instruments aboard
the Mars Global Surveyor. NASA relies upon the peer-review
process and competitive peer review to fund analysis of the data
it acquires and awaits newly published (or proposals to
undertake such) interpretations of the Cydonia face feature.
At present the Scientific advisory committees that formally
advise NASA have not interpreted the Cydonia feature as evidence
of extraterrestrial intelligence. NASA will continue to explore
all possibilities for the origin of landscapes on Mars using the
open process it has traditionally utilized, as well as by timely
release of all images acquired by operational spacecraft,
including the MGS.

NASA thanks the members of FACETS for their continuing interest
in the Cydonia region and welcomes additional comments.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Weiler
Associate Administrator for
Space Science

Enclosure

Announcement of Third Cydonia Observation
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/target/update4-20.html


____________________________


The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies research project
which chronicles and examines the leading-edge news, events,
ideas and discoveries that will shape the future of humanity as
we enter the 21st Century and a new Era


THE ERAS PROJECT

Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC V5T 2M9 Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/erasproject


� The Eras Project, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                         Re: Talk And Action - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 13:28:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:51:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Velez


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:19:51 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Felder

 >>From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
 >>Date: 18 May 2001 08:32:07 -0700
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hamilton

 ><snip>

 >>Gee Dick, my mouth is usually bigger than my pocketbook, but
 >>I will see what I can do. Of course I would want two copies as
 >>I need one for my library that is squeezing me out of house and
 >>home so I know what these congressman have to read on a dark
 >>and stormy night. I wonder, will they read this book?

 >Hell, no, they aren't gonna read this book or any other book on
 >UFOs. If they wanted to do that, they would have done it
 >already. A Congressman wants a 5 minute briefing, thank you for
 >stopping by, and leave the printed material with his aide on
 >your way out.


Hola Mz. Felder,

You wrote:

 >This whole Greer/Disclosure circus has gone beyond ridiculous,
 >in my opinion. Even Jason Leigh is now trying to grab on to the
 >bandwagon by yelling copyright infringement! When did he get out
 >of jail, anyway?

"Now I see," said the blind man. I kept wondering why you were
consistently referring to the valid criticisms by members of
this List (of Dr.Greer) as, "whining" and "bitching."

I guess it's only "whining" and "bitching" when somebody 'other
than yourself' is doing it!  <LMAO>

Have a good 'lurk.'  ;)


Regards to All,

John Velez, Amazed Human

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 19

              Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:20:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:56:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Friedman


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:10:33 -0400
 >From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto
 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:59:45 -0300

 >>>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >>>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>>I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >>>on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >>>was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >>>UFOs.

 >>>Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >>>day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >>>seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >>>green men.

 >>>Great job Nick!

 >>Kelly,

 >>Where have you been? I have been doing radio and TV interviews
 >>about UFOs for more than 30 years, always coming on very
 >>strongly (I am _not_ an apologist ufologist) and in more than
 >>90% of the cases have been treated very fairly, openly,
 >>respectfully.. or whatever positive words you want to use.

 ><snip>

 >Hi Stan,

 >In all honesty I fail to see what your resume has to do with the
 >little blurb I wrote on Nick's appearance on City TV.


Kelly, you expressed surprise that Nick was well treated. I
tried to show that neither you nor anybody else should be
surprised that people talking about flying saucers can be well
treated. I would like to get more people involved by reducing
the fear of ridicule... adding my experience to Nick's.

Sorry if I missed my objective.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                 Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:31:11 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:59:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:14:28 -0700

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 23:58:41 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

 >>>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:01:03 +1200

 >Robert, you answer William:

 >>Regardless of what Corso claimed or said, the fact of the matter
 >>was that storys about Russian putting everything from troops to
 >>missiles in cuba were floating around before 1962. In fact some
 >>of they started leaking out of the Cuban exile community after
 >>the Bay of Pigs Fiasco in 61'.

 >Do you have proof for this statement? Have you read Col. Corso's
 >version of these events. Have you read 'The Day After Roswell'?

 >>>William writes:
 >>>Whether there were stories being circulated or not regarding
 >>>anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba doesn't really make much
 >>>difference. The point being that it seemed to Corso the same lid
 >>>was clamped down on the nukes when the cannisters were
 >>>discovered, in essence forcing his hand.

 >And you answer:
 >>Corso wasn't in the "loop" when the pictures came back
 >>showing the missile cannisters

 >And on what do you base this statement? Col. Corso was in the
 >"loop", as you say. If he wasn't in the "loop" then where was
 >he?

 >Then you write:

 >>He saw the pictures along with everybody else after the crisis
 >>started.

 >And where did you come up with this BS.

 >>>As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
 >>>did not identify Corso by name.

 >Yes he did William! See Birnes interview

 >Then Robert writes:

 >>Here is the bottom line on Corso and his book. Corso himself
 >>claimed that Birnes stroked the book and material was not
 >>true/correct. Corso's own son has apprently claimed that about
 >>10 percent of the book is "worthwhile" apparently meaning
 >>correct. Obviously the son doesn't believe every word in the
 >>book, nor does he consider it UFO scripture never to be doubted
 >>or questioned.So in essence we have a book that
 >>(being generous) anywhere up to 70-90 percent of the
 >>book is a stroke job.

 >Robert, It sounds as if you know a thing or two about stroke
 >jobs, but I'd like to stop this bit of misinformation right here
 >and now. Last night I had an hour conversation with Col. Corso's
 >son, Phil. He was both cordial and informative and never once
 >seemed evasive or less than honest.

 >I asked him about the 10% quote and he said folks must have
 >misunderstood what he intended to say. He stated, (and I
 >paraphrase): Only ten percent of what my father had to say was
 >represented by the book. Yes, there were some mistakes but the
 >overall meat and potatoes of the book was absolutely true. My
 >father did exactly what he said he did concerning the alien
 >technology.

 >So there you have it. Phil Jr. endorses his father's beliefs
 >100%. "My father never exaggerated or swore."



Ed, I was there. I see now why Phil Corso Jr. didn't want the
session taped. He certainly exaggerated by always using Colonel
instead of Lt. Colonel, by claiming not only in a sworn
statement but also on the sales blurb that he was a member of
the NSC which he never was.

He never even attended an NSC meeting according to the
Eisenhower Library.

And, yes, Ed, I have read the book and met the son, the
co-author, and the good Lt. Colonel himself.

Do you really believe all the stuff like seeing a body (no ice
mentioned) at Ft. Riley, Kansas, unaccompanied by security
people?

When I asked him how he knew the exact date, he said he recalls
when he was transferred there which was months earlier. I don't
know about his swearing.

Next you will be telling us that Guy Kirkwood was an Air Force
jet pilot who took gun camera pictures of UFOs, that Robert
Lazar is a physicist and that Michael Wolf Kruvant had 6 major
College degrees.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:59:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:25:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:20:48 -0700


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:21:43 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I have attempted to avoid this fight, and I believe that Greg
 >>can defend himself quite well, however, I might throw a little
 >>fuel on the fire. I know that Corso (and not co-author Birnes)
 >>lied, at least twice.

 >Twice, is that all? How many times have you lied; and not little
 >white lies but big ones, and not about something as unimportant
 >as rank or a long ago held command but about very important
 >information?

Nope, twice is not all. I selected those two items because they
couldn't be blamed on Birnes or anyone else. We have the tape
with them coming out of his mouth. And, if you think lying about
his rank is unimportant, then you are mistaken. That is a court
martial offense. Besides, the point isn't about the relative
importance of the lies, but the fact that he did lie.

 >One of the most serious setbacks for the entire Roswell story,
 >especially among young intellectuals, was a 1995 article which
 >appeared in Omni Magazine: 'The Case Of the Vanishing Nurses' by
 >Paul McCarthy. The entire UFO community was made to look foolish
 >and just plain dumb. And you and Don were the main characters.
 >Do you remember? Even though I felt the way you both dealt with
 >McCarthy was less than professional, I still think you provide
 >the list with important information. I don't question the
 >honesty of what you write to us just because I know that you and
 >Don weren't entirely honest with Omni.

First, the story was begun by Don Schmitt and his communications
with McCarthy. Second, I always treated McCarthy with courtesy,
answering the questions he put to me, returning his telephone
calls in a timely fashion, and FAXing him, or mailing him the
documents that he requested. I was completely professional in my
dealing with him.

Third, there was information that I didn't give him because it
had been discovered by Don Schmitt. I told McCarthy at the time
that some of this was the result of Schmitt's research and I
believed then, and believe now, that it was Schmitt's decision
what he should release and what he should sit on. I explained to
McCarthy my reasoning here, telling him that he would need to
talk to Schmitt. I freely gave McCarthy everything that I had
discovered about the missing nurses.

Fourth, Schmitt has a habit of initiating such activities, but
once they started, he had little interest in completing them,
leaving others to fill in the blanks. Schmitt would not return
calls, would promise to send material and then wouldn't. I would
agree that these sorts of activities are unprofessional and I
told him at the time he had an obligation to supply the
information that McCarthy wanted.

Fifth, when McCarthy suggested that he had been able to gather
the records of the nurses through the National Record Center in
St. Louis, I asked Schmitt about this. Schmitt said that he had
gone there first (meaning he had written to them first) but they
had denied that the records were available. I asked Schmitt for
the documentation because it would certainly refute McCarthy's
allegation, but Schmitt never supplied it. I am forced to
conclude that Schmitt did not explore this avenue and was caught
off guard by McCarthy's success here.

Sixth, as he had done in the past, when caught by an
embarrassing question, Schmitt chose to lie about it. (Think: Do
you work at the post office? here). When McCarthy questioned
Schmitt about the missing nurses, Schmitt, for some incredibly
stupid reason told McCarthy that we (meaning Schmitt and I) had
invented this tale of a missing nurse to further the Roswell
case. I confess that I don't know what would possess him to make
such a statement, but I did not suggest that we had invented the
missing nurse tale and worked hard to either corroborate it or
refute it. The tale was invented by Glenn Dennis, and it was
only after six or seven years that we (and here we need to thank
Vic Golubic for his tireless efforts in learning the truth) that
we learned the nurse didn't exist.

So, while the story was an embarrassment, and it certainly set
serious research back, the real blame for this falls on
Schmitt's shoulders. He called McCarthy to interest him, he
supplied the information that McCarthy was able to refute and it
was Schmitt who lied to McCarthy. I was caught in the fall out
from this.

And, no, I haven't forgotten about this article because it was
the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the reason that I
told Schmitt that I didn't want to work with him any more. I
could tolerate the lies about his occupation, his education and
even his allegations that I was a government agent, but when he
managed to get me labeled a liar in a national magazine, that
was it.

 >I'd like folks to take another look at what Col. Corso was
 >saying and read 'The Day After Roswell' but you and others on
 >the List keep insisting it's all bull and try to blunt the
 >discussion. It's also clear that many of Col. Corso's critics
 >haven't actually read the book, carefully or any other way.

 >Col. Corso was a human and he made some mistakes but to
 >disregard his message is playing right into the hands of the
 >controllers, men like Richard Armitage.

Of course he made mistakes, but he also lied about many things.
You had asked for examples, and I supplied two. You then suggest
that we all lie and we shouldn't disregard Corso's message
because of his lies. But, it is for those very reasons that we
should reject Corso's story. That, and his tale that he shut
down the radars at White Sands so that the aliens he had met in
a cave could escape without detection, and his tale about Nazi
time travel machines mentioned at the end of the Dateline
interview.

 >"...The Col.(Corso) had a great deal of credibility and
 >expertise not only as a military officer but also in the fields
 >of intelligence and national security...and he very quickly
 >became a valued source of bountiful information that was
 >insightful and most important, accurate." Senator Strom
 >Thurmond

You seem to have forgotten that Senator Thurmond was angry about
the introduction because Corso had pulled the old bait and
switch on him. Thurmond demanded the introduction be pulled
because the book wasn't the one Corso had said that he was going
to write. What does that say about the integrity of the man?


 >Ed

 >PS And we should give Dr. Greer a chance to see what he and
 >those who've put themselves on the line are able to accomplish.
 >Whatever you, Stan, Greg, Jenny and Bruce have been trying to
 >do, hasn't been working.

Only because people like Corso and Greer manage to undo
everything we have accomplished. Takes five or ten years to
establish some credibility and only five or ten minutes to undo
it.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 19

                                  'The 400'

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:34:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:34:12 -0400
Subject: 'The 400'



From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


While rummaging through the archives here, preping tonight's
program, I came across the following 1997 file.

ebk

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:47:04 -0800 (PST)
To: MindNet@blacklodge.c2.net
From: vericomm@c2.net
Subject: MindNet Journal - Vol. 2, No. 2A



================================================================
      MindNet Journal - Vol. 2, No. 2A * [Part 1 of 2 parts]
================================================================
      V E R I C O M M sm                 "Quid veritas est?"
================================================================
Sender: Owner-MindNet@c2.org
Precedence: bulk

The views and opinions expressed below are not necessarily the
views and opinions of VERICOMM or the editors, unless otherwise
noted.

The following is reproduced here with the express permission of
the author.

Permission is given to reproduce and redistribute, for
noncommercial purposes only, provided this information and the
copy remain intact and unaltered.

Copy formatted in ASCII. Netscape mail reader format:
"Options/Mail & News Preferences/Appearance" = Fixed Width Font.

Editor's Note:

The author of the following article, physicist Jack Sarfatti,
lives in the San Francisco Bay Area.

From: http://www.hia.com/pcr/si03.html

================================================================

SARFATTI'S ILLUMINATI: IN THE THICK OF IT!

By Jack Sarfatti

Copyright (c) Jack Sarfatti, 1992, 1995

Update from Jan. 29, 1996

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

Jim Garrison and Tom Jenkins from Gorbachev Foundation hosted a
fun-filled birthday party for Nina Kucharev on this past Saturday
night on the third floor of my office at 3220 Sacramento Street
in San Francisco. Tom Jenkins is a former physicist who arranges
much of the logistics for Jim Garrison, such as Boris Yeltsin's
visit to the USA before he became President of Russia. Tom and I
had an interesting conversation in which we both noted the
amazing patterns of synchronicity linking physicists interested
in consciousness, extra-terrestrial intelligence, remote-viewing
and other fringe areas with the pivotal events that ended the
Cold War. Danny Sheehan, who also visits our office, was
co-founder with Garrison, of the now defunct Christic Institute,
a casualty of the Iran-Contra operation. Sheehan, has had
childhood "close encounter experiences" analogous to the one I
reported in "The Parsifal Effect." Evidently, it might appear
that Dan Sheehan, was also part of the "400" contactees mentioned
to me on the phone in 1952 by the alleged "conscious computer" on
the spacecraft from the future. Harvard Professor John Mack,
influential in the Esalen-Soviet Exchange Program, and under fire
from Harvard for his bold study of UFO abductees, is also, it
might appear, part of the "400."

Curiously, my writings influenced, in a sort of Forrest Gump way,
forces on the opposing side to Garrison and Sheehan. Now we are
all partying together like Tim Leary and Gordon Liddy appearing
on the same stage in their intellectual vaudeville act. It is as
if Umberto Ecco's _Foucault's Pendulum_ has passed from fiction
to fact in this latest version of Balzac's Human Comedy
orchestrated by John Lilly's "Cosmic Coincidence Control" from
the future. This is more than the random "Butterfly Effect" of
classical chaos theory. It suggests Fred Hoyle's idea that the
initial quantum fluctuation amplified by classical chaos is
intelligently manipulated and shaped by advanced starwaves from
the future. Indeed, Tom's role with the Gorbachev-Yeltsin
circles paralleled mine with the Reagan Administration via  Lawry
Chickering's Institute for Contemporary Studies and the  second
channel of influence opened by Cap Weinberger's son.

Michael and Dulce Murphy came to the party and I was impressed
with Michael's description to me of Dulce's recent efforts to
narrow the growing rift between Russian and US foreign policy by
catalyzing communication and dialogue between the future leaders
of both countries. Michael is the author of _The End To Ordinary_
History which covers some events similar to those described here.
As Jim Garrison accurately said, stabilizing Russia today is not
as "sexy" as it was a few years ago and, as Michael Murphy
pointed out "Russia still has 20,000 nuclear warheads." The
influence of former KGB in the new Russian Mafia is of course a
major fact to be reckoned with.

Update from Sept 25, 1995 San Francisco Chronicle, pp.A, 15-17.

By Edward Epstein

"... Gorbachev Foundation USA has organized the 'State of the
World Forum' ... a five year process of consultation that will
meet annually until the year 2000 ... About 500 people are
expected to attend .... these will include ... Milton Friedman,
... David Packard and Ted Turner... Jane Fonda... Jane
Goodall,... Carl Sagan ... princes from Saudi Arabia ... Deepak
Chopra.... Gorbachev will be joined by ... George Bush ....
Margaret Thatcher ... 'Gorbachev believes we are giving birth to
a new global civilization,' said Jim Garrison, executive director
of the Gorbachev Foundation which occupies waterfront offices in
San Francisco's Presidio.

"Leaders of mainline Western religions or philosophies are mostly
absent from the speaker's lineup, while unorthodox describes many
on the list. These include ... Willis Harman, President of the
Institute of Noetic Sciences ... he conducted experiments on the
effects of psychedelic drugs on human creativity .... Jerry
Mander, now an anti-technology author ...."

It was the night before the first Birkbeck test of Uri Geller.
Brendan was visibly nervous. He asked me to go with him to see
the Soviet science fiction film _Solaris_. Brendan had mentioned
that Olaf Stapeldon's science fiction story _Star Maker_, about
a time traveling super-intelligence, was based upon real
experiences that a high member of British Intelligence [1] had in
the nineteen thirties. The big day arrived. Arthur C. Clarke [2]
was there with a high official from Rolls Royce. Arthur Koestler
[3] was also there along with John Hasted [4], David Bohm and a
few others. These events have been described by Martin Gardner
[5] and I will not discuss them here. What happened after the
tests is more important. If I remember correctly, Brendan and I
went with Uri to his hotel room where I met Andrija Puharich [6],
Sir John Whitmore and, perhaps, Ira Einhorn [7]. I could be wrong
about Einhorn [8]. I startled Uri by asking him if he could
trigger a nuclear weapon by psychokinesis. I later found out from
Ron Mc Rae [9] that some of our intelligence people were greatly
concerned about that possibility. I may have initiated that
concern because I had mentioned it several times to large groups
of people at several meetings.

I was back in Paris several weeks later with Sharon. Fred Wolf
said: "Jack, I'm going to introduce you to a man who will change
your life." Fred took me and Sharon to the swank Ritz Hotel. We
waited in the lobby and a guy who looked like Richard Gere [10]
in a jump suit walks in with a woman. He says: "Hi, I'm Werner
Erhard." I had never heard of the guy. I said, "What do you do?"
Werner replied: "I make people happy." I thought, "Why am I
wasting time with this yo yo?" And, hoping to make a quick exit,
said in a sassy Damon Runyon manner, "Oh yeah, I think you must
be some kind of an asshole!" Werner's face became positively
radiant and he cracked a Mephistophelian [11] smile, embraced me
saying: "I will give you money when you come to San Francisco." I
was taken aback by an unexpected offer I could not refuse. I was
under contract with E.P. Dutton by then and was planning to go to
Chicago to finish _Space-Time and Beyond_ at Bob Toben's place.
Werner then outlined his plan for me to set up a sort of Ghost
Busters team of physicists to research psychic phenomena and in
his words "the physics of consciousness." Werner said that he was
very interested in physics and that he wanted me and Fred Wolf to
tutor him and his "trainers."

We flew to New York. Sharon and I spent a few days with Uri
Geller, Ira Einhorn, Bob Toben, Sir John Whitmore and Andrija
Puharich at Puharich's large house in Ossining. Puharich gave me
his book _URI_. I did not have time to read it but I gave it to
my mother in Brooklyn a few days later. My mother was reading the
book [12] when she suddenly exclaimed: "Jacky, Jacky, this is
what happened to you!" "What happened to me? What are you talking
about Ma?" "The computer in the flying saucer that called you on
the telephone when you were a little boy. Don't you remember when
you got all those phone calls?" An electric shock went through me
-- I only remember one phone call. "What do you mean phone calls?
I only got one call." "No you didn't! Jacky, what's the matter
with you? You got three weeks of these crazy calls. You were on
the phone for hours at a time walking around glassy-eyed. I got
worried and grabbed the phone away from you. I said, 'Who is
this? Why are you calling my son?' I heard that voice. It said
it was a computer. It wanted you to come back to the telephone. I
  said, 'Don't you call back here again,' and hung up and that was
  that." Not even a super-technological conscious computer on
board  a flying saucer from the future can argue with an irate
Jewish Mother!

Bob Toben drove Sharon and me down to Philadelphia. We stayed
with my literary agent Ira Einhorn and his doomed girl friend
Holly Maddux [13]. Ira took us to the mainline mansion of  Arthur
Young. Young was the inventor of the Bell Helicopter and was a
close friend of Charles Lindbergh. Young's wife was an heiress of
the Forbes Steel fortune. Young financed the Institute for the
Study of Consciousness in Berkeley California. He invited me to
stay there. Einhorn told me he would introduce me to Stewart
Brand, Michael Murphy [14] and George Leonard [15] when I got to
San Francisco. He was very concerned about what he called "Soviet
breakthroughs in psychotronic weapons of mind control at a
distance using ELF and sound waves." He said he had support from
the local telephone company and from the Bronfman [16] in Toronto
to link up visionary scientists like myself. He also said he was
working with Jacques Vallee [17] and Brendan O Regan on a UFO
data base. Ira mentioned that he was working with Congressman
Charlie Rose (D. North Carolina) of the House Select Committee on
Intelligence [18]. Rose confirmed his connection to Einhorn in a
telephone conversation with me.

Werner was as good as his word and promptly had his EST
Foundation write me an initial $5,000 check (Autumn 1974).
Einhorn did his job as my literary agent and arranged a meeting
at Arthur Young's Institute in Berkeley that included Michael
Murphy, Hazel Henderson [19] and another physicist, Saul Paul
Sirag [20], who was Barbara Honegger's [21] lover. Werner gave me
free run of his organization which I found rather odd. The
estoids all seemed to be glassy-eyed and very creepy [22]. One in
particular, Raz Ingrasci, talked about Werner as if he were
God-incarnate. One day Raz said he would jump out of a high
window if Werner ordered him to. One day I noticed a table with a
sign that said "Bulgarian Desk" [23]. There were a lot of pretty
young women who were easily available since I was known as one of
Werner's special friends -- a Prince of the Court. Werner was
always very warm with me and invited me to many dinners both at
Franklin House and at expensive restaurants. He never carried any
money or credit cards. We were always escorted (in a Mercedes) by
a security team, who also paid all the bills.

A former student of physicist John Wheeler [24], Robert Fuller
was head of Werner's Foundation. Fuller had been President of
Oberlin College but had suffered a mid-life crisis and had fallen
under Werner's influence. Fuller now heads the World Watch
Institute in Washington. Fuller [25] was jealous of Werner's
fondness for me and that this was a factor precipitating my
falling out with Werner. I was worried about the crypto-Nazi feel
of the est-org, but I had hoped that Werner would get his
intellectual act together and say something of genuine interest
in terms of physics and philosophy. I was not at all subservient
to Werner in his presence like most of the academics that
surrounded and apparently adored him. Some of them called him the
"new Heidegger" [26]. Professor Irwin Corey [27] made more sense.
There was a lot of talk of Werner running for President one day.
Werner said he would appoint me to be head of the National
Science Foundation. Werner's brother Nathan Rosenberg was in the
Navy as an aide to President Carter's Secretary of Defense Harold
Brown [28]. Kevin Garvey [29] told me that Werner had fifteen
loyal estoids in the Carter White House. Werner was very active
with the training of government people in Washington D.C. Carter
[30] had created Project Scanate [31] for remote-viewing of
military targets by psychics. Werner used remote-viewing in his
training, and he also contributed money to SRI for that project.

Sidney was a close friend of the late Bishop Pike. Werner had me
meet with several Stanford and U.C. Faculty before he set up the
Physics Consciousness Research Group at Esalen with me and
Michael Murphy as co-directors. Michael arranged all our
activities in Big Sur. Saul Paul Sirag [32] was my chief
assistant. Michael arranged for Jean Lanier to supply me with
money. Jean, who resembled Shirley MacLaine [33], was the widow
of the late Chairman of the Board of Stone-Webster Engineering.
Her current husband was an Episcopal Priest, Sidney Lanier.
Sidney was a close friend of the late Bishop Pike. He was active
in New York off-broadway theater. Sidney was also a close friend
of Jose Ferrer, who I resemble. Jean rented a five bedroom suite
for us on top of Nob Hill [34]. She was a close friend of
Laurance Rockefeller who would telephone the Nob Hill flat
looking for her.

I attended the EST April Celebrity Training of 1975. The list of
trainees included Ellie Coppola, Sterling Hayden [35], Michael
Murphy, Buzz Aldrin [36], Ted Ashley [37], the late Jerry Rubin
[38], Fred Wolf, Saul Paul Sirag and many others. Sterling Hayden
quickly walked out calling Werner a "Nazi" as he pushed away some
estoids who tried to block his passage. Michael Murphy was
visibly upset and angry at his close friend Werner. I was sitting
with Astronaut Buzz Aldrin, who was having a severe kidney
problem. Werner got all confused when he tried to talk about the
new physics. He let me explain to the group in ordinary language
what he was trying to say in his hypnotic _estspeak_.

The trick of est is to seduce your consciousness by subverting
the English language with dominating psycho-babble. It was right
out of George Orwell's 1984. The est-training did get every one
high. It must have been how the SS officers felt after being
indoctrinated as leaders of the Master Race.

I was introduced to Ellie Coppola during a break in the training.
She had just read _Space-Time and Beyond_. Ellie invited Fred
Wolf and me to her home at 2800 Broadway at 2am after the
training. We met her husband Francis Ford Coppola. The first
thing Francis said to me was that he did not like Werner Erhard
but that he would not tell his wife what to do. Francis has fine
moral instincts. I was getting suspicious of Werner [39]
especially after I heard the rumor that he said he changed his
name from Jack Rosenberg to Werner Erhard to "give up Jewish
weakness for German strength."

I started to spend a lot of time at the Coppola's house. I
introduced them to Uri Geller and to Einhorn's friend, French UFO
scientist Jacques Vallee [40]. I think Steven Spielberg and
George Lucas were there as well that time but I am not sure.
Vallee became technical consultant to _Close Encounters of the
Third Kind_ as a result of that introduction. Francois Trauffaut
[41] played the role of Jacques Vallee in the Spielberg film. Ira
Einhorn had introduced me to Vallee. Einhorn and Vallee were
working together on a computer network project that anticipated
the Internet. Einhorn originally introduced me to Hazel
Henderson, Arthur Young, Stewart Brand and Michael Murphy.
Einhorn at Esalen is described by Willian Irwin Thompson in _The
Edge of History_. Congressman Charlie Rose (D. North Carolina) of
the House Committee on Intelligence confirmed to me by telephone
that Ira was involved in National Security operations. Ira, like
O.J. Simpson, always claimed he was framed by "the KGB." It is
curious that he was never found. Ira spent weeks at Esalen after
he was indicted for the murder of Holly Maddux. Senator Arlen
Specter was his defense attorney and one of the Bronfmans from
Toronto allegedly paid his legal fees.

I met Jack Nicholson [42], Michael Douglas, Milos Forman, Saul
Zaentz and Hans Syberberg [43] at various parties at the
Coppola's Broadway mansion and at Tomasso's Restaurant in North
Beach where Francis would bake the pizza in the wood-burning
oven. Francis was running CITY Magazine. Ellie had Raisa
Gustaitus do an article about our Esalen Group called "Faster
than the speeding photon." I first met Stephen Schwartz [44] at
CITY where he was assisting Warren Hinckle [45]. I once walked
into the Caffe Trieste with Francis when Steve Turner walked up
to him and aggressively pushed him calling him a "dirty dog."
Francis floored Turner with one punch. My meeting with Hans
Syberberg at Francis's showing of _Our Hitler_ is of particular
importance because it involved a man named "Putzi."

I received a phone call from a man named George Koopman [46]
during one of our Esalen seminars in 1976. He asked if he could
come to Big Sur. I said yes. Koopman soon became a financial
patron of my _Ghost Busters_ [47] at Esalen. Koopman was a  close
friend of Dan Akroyd [48], and my group was the  inspiration for
the film Ghost Busters. He provided money  through military
contracts with the Air Force and the U.S.  Army Tank Command
funnelled through his company Insgroup in  Irvine, California.

Koopman was addicted to cocaine and would talk freely when high.
He told us that he was related to Arthur Krock, the publisher of
the New York Times. He said that he had blown the whistle on U.
S. Army Intelligence domestic spying to the New York Times.
Koopman said that he had worked on the "kook desk" for the
Defense Intelligence Agency and that they were very interested in
the kind of new physics we were working on. They were especially
interested in machines that could tell the future [49] and in new
kinds of aircraft propulsion systems. Koopman liked to show how
he could open locked doors with his burglar tools that he always
carried in his brief case. He showed me a letter from the
military giving him permission to have the tools.

Koopman was very interested in Werner Erhard's tax structure. I
took Koopman to meet Werner. Werner was in a room with a large
blackboard. On the board were several references to "UFOs" and
"extra-terrestrial contacts." Werner did not seem to trust
Koopman.

I found out through one of my girlfriends [50] that Koopman
succeeded in spying on the Arica organization. Koopman, Sirag and
I had heard weird stories from Jan Brewer at Esalen that Arica
was started in Chile by high ranking fugitives from the Third
Reich who were masters of the occult. Many of the regulars at
Esalen, including some of our group like Dr. John Lilly [51] and
Claudio Naranjo [52] had been in the first Arica training in
Chile. Timothy Leary was released from prison. Leary became part
of my group at Esalen. Leary was a close friend of Michael
Murphy. George Koopman arranged for Leary and me to lecture
together at the Arthur Young's Institute in Berkeley. Koopman
spent a lot of money hiring a professional T.V. crew to record
us. Robert Anton Wilson, Nick Herbert and Saul Paul Sirag
participated in this event. Koopman became Leary's business
manager and publisher. Leary's message was SMI2LE (Space
Migration Intelligence Increase Life Extension) which is also the
message of this book.

Koopman sabotaged me at Esalen by suddenly breaking his contract
and stopping the cash flow he had committed. The ostensible
reason was that I had insulted the New Age seminarians at Esalen
by calling them "idiots and morons," which I did.. Werner would
say much worse in his trainings. Koopman was very high when he
confronted me with this supposed sin. Koopman would show up at
the Caffe Trieste on several occasions years later. Koopman was
apparently ordered by higher ups to cut me out of the Esalen
picture because I was too much of a "loose cannon" that they
could not control. They replaced me with my assistant Saul Paul
Sirag and with Nick Herbert who continued to run the Esalen
seminars. It may be that Koopman's death in 1989 was no accident.
That's just a hunch. Chipman's death around the same time as
Koopman's may also not have been from natural causes.

I walked into the Caffe Trieste one day in 1979. A young girl,
Maiti, said she had written a poem about me. We soon started
dating. She said her father was a "senior policy planner" in the
government, but she did not agree with his politics and had
briefly been in the Weatherman. She showed me a photograph of her
Grandfather, who was a German General (Rudel) during World War
Two. Her father had met her mother while on Army duty after the
war. One day her father telephoned and said that he heard that
the Philadelphia Incident [53] was really true. Maiti mentioned
that her father had ET contacts as a child like I had. Her father
was an Arabic-speaking expert in Middle-East affairs with high
level contacts. He once sent me a manuscript on the Qabala and
the mystical union between Judaism, Christianity and Islam. One
day Maiti showed me a copy of a letter that her father, Robert
Dickson Crane [54], wrote of his friend Anthony Weiner at the
Hudson Institute. The letter [55] says in part:

"Another individual, who may be just plain crazy but also has a
slight chance, in my view of being another Einstein, is Jack
Sarfatti, who is plugging his 'faster than light' quantum physics
... The reason I am interested in Sarfatti's ideas is that the
full potential of negentropy in human thought can be realized
only if Sarfatti is right. ...Assuming that Sarfatti is wrong ...
the insights of Minsky and of your own cerebration offer about
all that the state of the artificial intelligence art can handle
for the next decade anyway. If Sarfatti should ever prove to be
right, then our work on negentropy in human thought would have
created the tools for tapping whatever potential there is in the
'new physics.'"

I recently had breakfast with Maiti in the Haight-Ashbury. She
said her father had recently converted to Islam and wanted to be
the first US Army Islamic Chaplain. She also said that her father
was a close friend of conservative Pat Buchanan. Herb Caen, in
the March 4, 1996 San Francisco Chronicle, cites a wag on the GOP
"First they gave us a guy who says 'Read my lips," now they give
us a guy who says "Read _Mein Kampf_.'" :-)

Crane's remarks are not that different from Martin Gardner's [56]
published statement:

"In recent years Sarfatti has been promoting an invention ....
designed to transmit coded information faster than light. I know
of no other physicist who thinks it will work. If it does,
Sarfatti will become one of the greatest physicists of all time."

I now think that the actual designs I had for faster-than-light
communication devices back in 1979 would not have worked. I was
remote-viewing my future design with a low signal to noise ratio.
Nick Herbert also published a design that would not have worked.
I think that today in 1992 I do have a design that will work that
I will explain later on. Only experiment will decide. The point
here is that if my weird physics turns out to be right, then it
is evidence for my being a contactee of either alien
extra-terrestrials or advanced humans or artificial intelligences
from our future. If my physics turns out to be wrong, then I am
just plain nuts [57], and you wasted your money on rubbish -- but
perhaps you had fun on the way. I feel like Zorba the Greek in
this matter -- if you remember the last scene of the movie you'll
get my meaning.

My adventures with two more women during this period are worth
mentioning before moving on to the next Act. One named Crystal
picked me up in the Caffe Trieste. She was a statuesque blonde in
a low cut green evening dress. Crystal said she belonged to a
Coven of Beautiful Witches [58], who wanted me to be their
Warlock. This was not so crazy in Frisco back then. After we made
love she introduced me to a real nut who called himself Damian
Zarrow. He said he was from Esalen and that he was in contact
with extra-terrestrials and that he was testifying before a
Senate Committee. I later found out that Crystal knew another
girl friend of mine from Esalen named Betty Andreason. I have
since heard of a woman by that name, who claims to have been
abducted by UFOs. I don't know if its the same woman.

In view of the present-day Esalen-Erhard-Yeltsin-Gorbachev
connections [59], the 1979 Esalen-UFO connection is significant.
Even though I had split with Werner Erhard by late 1977, EST's
Raz Ingrasci phoned me and asked me to meet with Jenny O Conner.
Raz said that Jenny had been sent to Werner by Sir John Whitmore
who had funded Andrija Puharich's collaborations with Uri Geller
back in 1973. Jenny claimed to be channeling messages from "The
Nine" -- the same extra-terrestrials that Puharich wrote about.
In view of my own contact in 1952 I should have been more
diplomatic with Jenny when she came to my apartment at 2 Whiting
Place -- the apartment that Michael Murphy had given me. Jenny
impressed me as total fraud, and I practically kicked her out. I
was verbally very rude. Jenny and The Nine [60] was promptly
installed at Esalen for quite some time overlapping with visits
by the late physicist Heinz Pagels, Congressman Charlie Rose,
Ira Einhorn, and high ranking Russians from Georgy Arbatov's
Moscow Institute of US and Canada, which was influential during
Gorbachev's watch.

Soviet Officials at Esalen in late 70's and early 80's:

* Valentin M. Berezhkov [61]
* Yuri A. Zamoshkin [62]
* Andrey A. Kokoshin [63]
* Henrikas Jushkevitshus [64]
* Vladimir M. Kuznetsov
* Victor M. Pogostin [65]
* Vlail P. Kaznacheyev
* Joseph Goldin [66]

This list is not complete. Vladimir Posner is an important fellow
in all this according to Schwartz and Tinkerman. The fact
remains, the iron post of observation that a bunch of apparently
California New Age flakes into UFOs and psychic phenomena,
_including myself_, had made their way into the highest levels of
the American ruling class and the Soviet Union and today run the
Gorbachev Foundation.

Did these influential Russian policy pundits get high in the hot
tubs of Esalen as has been alleged by right-wing theorists? My
current lady friend, who was living near Esalen at the time, and
spent a lot of time there with Richard Feynman, says that drugs
were not used in the Soviet-Esalen Exchange. If they got high,
it was the magic of Esalen and the meditative serenity of the
incredible natural environment and spiritual stimulation that
Michael Murphy has catalyzed over the years..

Was Jan Brewer telling the truth about the Fourth Reich using
Arica to influence the New Age? Brewer was part of the original
Esalen group of forty that went to Chile for the first Arica
training with Oscar Ichazo [67]. Arica was big at Esalen at the
same time that the Soviets were soaking in the hot tubs. Was I
pulled out of the operation by George Koopman because in his
opinion I was unpredictable and uncontrollable? Or is the truth
still even stranger than even I can imagine? Was Michael Murphy a
brilliant Puppet Master or merely a lucky charming "useful
idiot," a Forrest Gump character like me? Was Ira Einhorn framed?
Was Jean Nadal murdered? Was Francois Trauffaut murdered? Was
Harold Chipman [68] murdered? Was George Koopman murdered? Is
this all my Walter Mitty paranoid exaggeration? What do you
think?

[Continued to part 2]
----------------------------------------------------------------
MindNet Journal FTP Archive Filename: [mn202a.txt]
================================================================

To receive the MindNet Journal via email:

Send message: [subscribe mindnet] to: <Majordomo@c2.org>.

To unsubscribe:

Send message: [unsubscribe mindnet] to: <Majordomo@c2.org>.

Back issues of the MindNet Journal are available at our
FTP Archive site: ftp://idiom.com/users/vericomm/mindnet/

The MindNet Journal Publication Index contains descriptions
of all back issues and is located at the FTP site (filename:
[mnindex#.txt]).

Letters to editor, Mike Coyle: <vericomm@idiom.com>.

Submission of articles for publication within the MindNet
Journal on the subjects of mind control, directed-energy
weapons, non-lethal weapons, ritual abuse, UFO abductions,
bioelectromagnetics, hypnosis and other related topics will be
accepted with the author's statement of permission to publish.
The editor reserves the right to accept or reject for
publication. The publisher disclaims all responsibility to
return unsolicited matter. Send articles for publication to:
<vericomm@idiom.com> or VERICOMM, POB 32314, Oakland, CA
94604-2314 USA.

VERICOMM (sm) and its agents disclaim any and all responsibility
or liability for any and all claims and/or guarantees, express
or implied, and delivery of products, merchandise and/or
services offered for sale by advertisers and/or authors within
the MindNet Journal.

The MindNet Journal mailing list is owned and maintained by
VERICOMM (sm), POB 32314, Oakland, CA 94604-2314 USA.

================================================================











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

               Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:41:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 12:28:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:20:33 -0300

 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:10:33 -0400
 >>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto
 >>>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:59:45 -0300

 >>>>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >>>>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>>>I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >>>>on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >>>>was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >>>>UFOs.

 >>>>Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >>>>day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >>>>seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >>>>green men.

 >>>>Great job Nick!

 >>>Kelly,

 >>>Where have you been? I have been doing radio and TV interviews
 >>>about UFOs for more than 30 years, always coming on very
 >>>strongly (I am _not_ an apologist ufologist) and in more than
 >>>90% of the cases have been treated very fairly, openly,
 >>>respectfully.. or whatever positive words you want to use.

 >><snip>

 >>Hi Stan,

 >>In all honesty I fail to see what your resume has to do with the
 >>little blurb I wrote on Nick's appearance on City TV.

 >Kelly, you expressed surprise that Nick was well treated. I
 >tried to show that neither you nor anybody else should be
 >surprised that people talking about flying saucers can be well
 >treated. I would like to get more people involved by reducing
 >the fear of ridicule... adding my experience to Nick's.

 >Sorry if I missed my objective.

I'm sorry Stan! I was just sensitive because someone asked me
the other day where I had been when I asked what "The Weakest
Link" was. But I have watched a lot of news programs over my
life and have never seen UFOs discussed. So, I was surprised.
I'm happy that you receive such great media coverage! You keep
up the good work too!

And I did see you once on TV and I thought: Hey! I know him!
He's kinda cute for a UFO guy!

Kelly

Cheerleader extraordinaire!

Go Nick Go!
Go Stan Go!
Go Larry Go! (Burp!)


Sorry, as senility is settling in I have forgotten the rest of
the cheer. Oh! I remember!

Oh when the aliens!
Come marching in!
Oh when the aleins come marching in!
Oh Errol! I want to be in that number!
When the aliens come marching 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 20

               Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly

From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:03:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:09:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Kelly


 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 06:04:19 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:51:44 -0400
 >>From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>I just watched Nick Balaskas of York University (Physics Dept)
 >>on City TV, in Toronto, talk about the Shag Harbour case and I
 >>was absolutely stunned by the City TV personalities openess to
 >>UFOs.

 >>Basically two of them said they believed in UFOs and that one
 >>day they would land. The interviewer treated the subject
 >>seriously and Nick respectfully and never once mentioned little
 >>green men.

 >Hello Kelly:

Hi Larry!

 >Amazing. One whole broadcast without a single mention of the
 >"little green men" which were never credibly reported in the
 >first place.

Really! Everyone knows that they are grey, or greyish, or
reptilian. My major concern with UFO occupants is that spiders
and I don't get along too well and if Storm Trooper bugs ever
decide to invade Earth then I will kill them with abandon. Bugs
bring out a horrible side of me. You wouldn't want to know me.

 >How long did it take? Half a century?

For what? Maybe!

 >Still amazing, even for Canada with its high broadcasting
 >standards.

Ha! The media, politicans and business all sleep in one big,
soggy bed. It's disgusting.

 >Best

 >- Larry Hatch

 >PS: One talk show host even interviewed Larry Hatch, (that's me
 >believe it or not) while the States were booming with Art Bell
 >types. Testimony no doubt to their high lasagna and good taste


What does that mean? Do they put drugs in lasagna in the states?

 >[burp]

 >I hope I wasn't a complete bore.

You're never boring Larry! You're very funny. Well, I think I
have bothered Errol and the List enough tonight! I should tell
one of my UFO stories as an act of penance! Hummmmmmm. However,
I think I will go and look for my old cheerleading outfit
instead! Thanks for the idea!


Kelly









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:37:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:11:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 22:30:58 -0000

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:12:15 -0500

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

<snip>

 >Dennis,

 >You might be amazed as to how much I agree with your "cynical"
 >appraisal of trying to get Congress to act, and my view is based
 >on having lived in and around Washington, D.C., for over 40
 >years, working for Congressional Information Service (12 years),
 >and interacting with lots of VIPs. Which is more than probably
 >98% of the people on this list can say. For an "outside the
 >Beltway" observer, you are well on target.


Dick,

I thank you and my family thanks you! And, no, I'm not amazed that
we agree on something.

 >However, to the best of my knowledge Rockefeller did not target
 >Congress; the "Best Evidence" was targeted to news media moguls
 >and corporate chiefs; with (as far as I know) invisible
 >"results."

My mistake. Different targets, same results. That is,
practically nil. I suspect Bigelow's distribution of the Roper
Report, which you didn't address, racked up similar results.

 >I totally agree with you that Congressional hearings are not in
 >the cards, unless outside events occur that force the issue. In
 >fact, I think Greer (if anything) succeeded in making hearings
 >even less likely than they may have been before.


We agree once again.

 >But where are you coming from with this comment, since you don't
 >seem to think there is anything there worth investigating in the
 >first place?

 >Dick

Uh, I'm not sure what you mean by this last statement. Could you
elucidate, based on my own comments?

Or maybe I can turn the tables. Which aspects of ufology do you
think should be investigated by science, and which ones should
be investigated by Congress?

Do I think there is a massive government UFO cover up in place a
la MJ-12, capable of being revealed by Congressional
investigation? Yes, I don't. (Which would pretty much, ipso
facto, tank Roswell, wouldn't it? A case that you, CUFOS, and
the coalition just can't give up on.)

Do I think one in forty Americans have been abducted? Yes, I
don't. Do you?

Do you think Hopkins and Jacobs have a lock-grip on same?

If so, what should we do about it?

Assume all your UFO wishes come true.

Then what?

Will tomorrow be any different from today?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 23:53:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:19:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:20:48 -0700

<snip>

 >I'd like folks to take another look at what Col. Corso was
 >saying and read 'The Day After Roswell' but you and others on
 >the List keep insisting it's all bull and try to blunt the
 >discussion. It's also clear that many of Col. Corso's critics
 >haven't actually read the book, carefully or any other way.

 >Col. Corso was a human and he made some mistakes but to
 >disregard his message is playing right into the hands of the
 >controllers, men like Richard Armitage.

 >Ed

 >PS And we should give Dr. Greer a chance to see what he and
 >those who've put themselves on the line are able to accomplish.
 >Whatever you, Stan, Greg, Jenny and Bruce have been trying to
 >do, hasn't been working

Ed,

Has it ever occurred to you that you're being had not so much by
the likes of Armitage as by the likes of Corso, Birnes, and
Greer?

I thought not.

I've read Corso's book, and if you'll pardon the expression,
it's unaldulterated crap from start to finish. Human ain't got
nothing to do with it, unless your definition of human
encompasses good old chicanery.

You've been had.

Sorry.


Cheers,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:31:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:23:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:31:11 -0300
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

 >Ed, I was there. I see now why Phil Corso Jr. didn't want the
 >session taped. He certainly exaggerated by always using Colonel
 >instead of Lt. Colonel, by claiming not only in a sworn
 >statement but also on the sales blurb that he was a member of
 >the NSC which he never was.

Let me repeat: Phil Jr. said that he believes that what his
father said about the transfer of alien technology is 100% true,
but that was only ten percent of the total information his
father had to offer. He's sorry if there was some confusion .
There were many mistakes and his father went through the book,
page by page and highlighted them. The corrections were never
made because of litigation. Phil Jr. said the book was rushed by
the publishers because they were worried that the government
would forbid its publication.

On the dust jacket there is mention that Col Corso was a member
of the NSC but in the book itself, he makes it clear that he was
on the NCS staff. "I was asking president Eisenhower for a
personal favor: to let me out of my fifth year on the NCS staff
so I could pick up a command of my own antiaircraft guided
missile battalion being formed up in Red Canyon New Mexico."(pg
36) Now how could you miss this Stan, if you read the book
carefully?

There is no doubt about it; he was working for and with the NCS
but as a staff member. Let me say it again:staff, not member.
Other historians have recorded this fact. Col. Corso was a heavy
duty player.

He was involved with the overthrow of Jacob Arbenz in Guatemala
in the early 50's.

Again, he was a staff member, not a member of NCS. I think it's
understandable how this could become twisted to "member" of the
NCS. The book says staff of the NCS and on the Art Bell show
Corso says Army staff of the NCS and Col. Alexander agrees and
states that Col. Corso is certainly who he says he is.
(Alexander addresses Corso as Col. throughout the interview.)

Col. Corso was a very powerful man and had many powerful
friends. Among them were Robert Cutler and C.D. Jackson the
author of the "Atoms for Peace' speech. Col. Corso was also a
member of the Willoughby network. I don't know how to explain
this to you any stronger than I have, but you won't get much
information from the Eisenhower library. Corso was a spook.
Don't you understand? A spook; he ran with a serious and tough
crowd. These were mean streets. A mistake could mean death.

I posted an article on Col. Corso's FBI files and so far there
hasn't been a single criticism of my research on that article.
Only Greg, in the guise of responding, brought up an entirely
different subject: the Cuban missile crisis. And he wrote, in
effect, that Corso's information was nothing but BS in large
quantities. Now remember, I didn't bring up the subject but I
hope I've made folks on the list realize that Col. Corso was
telling the truth, from his point of view about the Cuban
crisis. The Birnes interview confirms that Paul Scott did break
the story and Corso was his source.

Stan, as I've written you many times; you're using the exact
same techniques to condemn Col. Corso and the AA as pelicanists
use against you and other Ufologists.

You won't look at the evidence and you refuse to draw a map,
metaphorical of course and worst of all, any excuse for
dismissing either subject will do: if one doesn't work, try
another.

Why would Col. Corso tell a lie of this magnitude? What evidence
do you have that he wasn't a very powerful person and didn't
have the type of access he claims he had?

How did Ray Santilli fake the AA?

Why do you refuse to look at the AA CDs or any of the new
evidence that Neil has presented and continues to accumulate.
Your main reason still seems to be that Ray lied to you, five
times I think it was.

But you offered Ray $100,000 for the footage. In essence your
position is that since Ray lied to you when you offered him the
100 grand, the AA is a fraud.

Other than that you have no evidence. But the AA is not a fraud.
And Col. Corso is not a liar.

http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m16-020.shtml

There is some confusion over Col. Corso's version of his rank
and various commands and we should try to figure out what the
problems are, not use this as a reason to reject Col. Corso's
testimony.

As for whether he was in command of the FT desk, here is the way
he describes his assignment: " I was to be his (Gen. Trudeau's)
special assistant in R&D." (pg38)

 >Do you really believe all the stuff like seeing a body (no ice
 >mentioned) at Ft. Riley, Kansas, unaccompanied by security
 >people?

So you're implying that this is BS but you have no evidence.
Greg said the there was no way that Corso was involved in the
Cuban missile crisis either, but now we know he was. Although
Col. Corso's accounts seem outlandish on the surface, we should
at least consider the possibility that what he's telling us
might be true and probably is. Col. Corso was an intelligence
officer and by all accounts a damn good one, too. You won't
find his name in any official lists of important people; only in
a few forgotten footnotes. But he's there none the less, and
turns out to be quite an intriguing fellow

Also what was that about a Nobel just awarded for research in 58
that Col. Corso supposedly transferred in 62. Could you be more
specific?


Ed










                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                 Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:02:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:25:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration? - Hatch


 >From: David Bolton <David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:42:44 +0100
 >Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:47:11 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Air Force Manual Illustration?

 >>I apparently missed the point of your query above.

 >An interesting bit of back-pedalling - what was it that prompted
 >you change your tone of response? ;-)

Huh? Please see below ..

 >>Document Title: JP 3-50.3 Joint Doctrine for Evasion
 >>and Recovery

 >Thanks - I've downloaded the .PDF, and its quite an interesting
 >document in it own right.

 >>The one-page summary merely says that JP 3-50.5
 >>replaces/supercedes AFM 200-3 and some other documents.

 >Actually, the search engine at:

 >http://searchpdf.adobe.com/

 >looks very useful - it seems to be able to turn up quite a few
 >of the "official" documents that are littered around the web.

 >David G Bolton

 ><David@Bolton.SOL.co.uk>


David, there was no "back-pedalling", no "change of tone". I
don't understand such rhetoric. In my haste (I get an awful lot
of email here) I simply misunderstood your original question. I
thought you were asking for opinions of the drawing, when in
fact you were looking for sources or provenance!

Thus the second message with what little I could browse up for
you. This is no change of tone, nor "back pedaling", but an
honest attempt to correct an oversight on my part.






                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                           The Legend of the Dropa

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:29:25 -0400
Subject: The Legend of the Dropa


Hello List Members,

Having spent the weekend exploring the net and my archives (and
raiding other people's � thanks, everyone, for your letters!), I
have reached a point in my research that I doubt I can go beyond
without some kind of major breakthrough. Below is a synthesis of
what I consider to be the most relevant information connected
with the case. Like the Alenon hoax we discussed a few months
ago, this is another UFO legend that deserves to rest in peace.
Unlike Alenon, however, there just may be _something_ real
hidden behind so much silliness.


1) THE LEGEND OF THE DROPA

A controversial finding made in 1938 on the Chinese-Tibetan
border adds yet another dimension to the problem of dwarfish
beings in Asia. According to the evidence amassed so far by
researchers of the case, it seems that an expedition to the
region of Baian-Kara-Ula discovered graves in an almost
inaccessible cave in which lay the skeletal remains of strange
thin-boned beings, just a few feet tall, with over-sized
craniums. Next to these were found some 716 mysterious dull-grey
discs. These discs each had a hole in the centre which made them
look like modern LPs. A series of �runes' extended out from the
holes to the edges of the discs.

Five scientists at the University of Beijing, under the
direction of Professor Tsum Um Nui, set about examining the
discs and the symbols inscribed on them.

After a long and thorough investigation, it was concluded that
the symbols conveyed a message of great importance. The �runes,'
they said, described spaceships which arrived on our planet some
twelve thousand years ago, piloted by a race of beings called
the Dropas (or �Dzopas'). When the Dropas descended from the
skies in their flying machines, say the inscriptions, the
earthlings fled in fear and hid in caves until they received
signs from the visitors that no harm was to come to them.

The study group compared their findings with information
gathered by the 1938 expedition, which had collected old
folklore from the region. The people of Baian-Kara-Ula had
spoken of creatures who once lived in the same area in
antiquity, also called Dropas (or "Khams"). The Dropas, they
said, were humanoid but hideously ugly and measured no more than
130 centimetres in height. As their name suggests, they were
mountain- dwellers (in Tibetan �drok-pa' means �men of the
mountains').

Unfortunately, the University of Beijing refused to acknowledge
the findings and forbade Tsum Um Nui to make the results of his
investigations known. The skeletons were officially �identified'
as belonging to an extinct species of monkey, and the discs were
simply ignored. Clearly the discovery had been too spectacular,
too controversial and too potentially damaging to the dogma of
the period. And there was something else: on the cave walls
where the discs were found, the expedition came across strange
painted images. "Inscriptions were clearly distinguished that
depicted the sun, the moon and the nine planets of our solar
system, all recorded on the rocky walls�They were pea-sized dots
which appeared to show the position of the Earth."

2) THE STORY BEHIND THE STORY

It has proved extremely difficult to obtain more details, or
verify those already accumulated. Serious research into the case
is hindered by the plethora of contradictions and lies
surrounding it. However it does serve as an excellent example of
how badly such �enigmas' are handled at times by ufologists and
writers who are willing to sacrifice historical accuracy and
common sense for the buzz of a �grail quest.' Let us try to put
the history of this particular quest into chronological order,
presenting both the �legend' as it stands and the few hard facts
known as they stand.

According to the legend, the discs were found at the bottom of a
grave in 1938 when scientists, led by archaeologist and
professor Chi Pu Tei, explored a network of connecting caves in
the mountains of Baian- Kara-Ula, along the Chinese-Tibetan
border. They also found the remains of humanoid beings with
short bodies and disproportionately large heads. Chi Pu Tei has
never been traced. (The correct English spelling of the mountain
range appears to be Bayan-Khara Uula, judging by the results of
Gordon Creighton's research at the House of Royal Geographical
Society in London, published in the January 1973 edition of
Flying Saucer Review. He also found no sign of there ever have
being an expedition to explore caves there.)

In 1962 professor Dr. Tsum Um Nui (whose existence has never
been proved, and whose name, though not necessarily an
invention, is an unusual mixture of Chinese and Japanese)
succeeded in translating the symbols on the discs and announced
his findings to a small group of friends and colleagues. The
Peking Academy of Prehistory did not allow the professor to
publish anything.

It is said that when Tsum Um Nui was finally permitted to
publish a report on the objects in 1964 he was mocked by all his
contemporaries and ultimately fled to Japan, where he died a few
years later.

Hartwig Hausdorf, the latest champion of the case, notes in the
sources for The Chinese Roswell that the first mention of the
discs in a non-specialist publication was in an article by V.
Ritsch and M. Tschernenko in Russian Digest. Hausdorf says this
article, titled Were Alien Visitors on Earth?, was included in a
1960 issue.

However, this conflicts firstly with the claim that Tsum Um Nui
translated the hieroglyphics in 1962 and secondly with
Hausdorf's statement that 'Dr. Vyatcheslav Saitzev' first told
the story of the alien discs of Bara Kara Ula for the Soviet
Magazine Sputnik�" This becomes even less clear when we read in
the same book that the German magazine Das vegetarische
Universum also published an article about the discs based on the
Sputnik report, yet the edition of the German magazine cited is
dated July 1962 and the Sputnik article was published in its
first issue in 1968!

On the other hand, Gordon Creighton wrote (in Flying Saucer
Review Vol.19, No.1 January 1973, p24-27) that he had learnt
that Zaitsev "had done no original investigation of his own and
had simply taken the story as it had appeared in theGerman
publication Das Vegetarische Universum (no date given) and in
theGerman publication UFO-Nachrichten, No. 95 (of 1964)."

In 1974 Ernst Wegener, an Austrian engineer, saw two of the
discs in the Banpo Museum in Xian. Although the museum director
could not offer an explanation for the objects, she let him
touch one of them and to photograph them. He took four shots but
as he had only a Polaroid camera with him the photos are
slightly blurred and do not show any signs of bearing
hieroglyphic symbols. Whether the discs were truly those found
in the 1938 expedition is impossible to say, as artefacts of
similar design are found all over China.

David Agamon (a pseudonym) edited a book about the Dropa called
Sungods in Exile in 1979, claiming it was the posthumous work of
a British scientist named Karyl Robin-Evans. Robin-Evans (who
did not exist) supposedly led an expedition to the
Baian-Kara-Ula area in 1947 in order to find out more about a
disc that had been bought in India or Nepal by his colleague at
Oxford, Polish Professor Sergei Lolladoff (who does not exist,
either). Agamon writes that the expedition came across a tribe
of dwarfs in a remote valley in Baian-Kara-Ula. These dwarfs,
the Dropa, told him that their ancestors had come from a planet
in the Sirius system and had crash-landed on earth in 1014 AD.
(There is no evidence that the Dropa have ever existed.) Agamon,
using his real name Gamon, wrote to the British magazine Fortean
Times (issue 75) stating that "Sungods in Exile" was his
"favourite hoax," and adding that "The author of this leg-pull
received correspondence from as far away as Kiev. Don't ask me
how I know." When Bob Rickard telephoned Gamon while preparing a
note on the case for issue 109 of the same publication, Gamon
confessed to the deceit.

In 1994, when Hartwig Hausdorf was in China, he asked the
current director of the Banpo Museum about the disks and was
told that they had disappeared.

A news item from China reporting on a surge of birth defects in
1995 has been misunderstood as the discovery of a previously
unknown tribe of dwarfs. Sixty cases of dwarfism were reported
in the village of Huilong in Sichuan. An investigation found the
water supply to be contaminated with poisonous metals (an
extremely common problem in rural China). In January 1997 USA
Today reported that no new cases had been recorded since the
water supply had been improved. Hausdorf and others popularised
the rumour that a tribe of dwarfs had been found near
Baian-Kara-Ula at last! (Obviously this would not have been
necessary if anyone could find a real Dropa tribesman.) 60 cases
of dwarfism had become 120 dwarfs in the imaginations of many �
an interesting exaggeration in itself.

For the record, the original report from USA Today (January 27th
1997) reads:

"Chinese Dwarfs [World]. High levels of mercury in the drinking
water of the village Huilong in Sichuan province are responsible
for sixty cases of dwarfism in the village, according to Chinese
officials. No new cases have been reported since the village
received a source of pollution-free drinking water."

To double-check this, I tried to find a scientific
report linking mercury poisoning with dwarfism. I couldn't find
one, though birth defects of many kinds are noted as a classic
consequence of mercury poisoning during pregnancy. Rural China
has often fallen victim to water contamination problems,
especially lead poisoning, which certainly has been linked with
growth problems in infants. If there is any doubt about the
effects of mercury on foetuses, the confusion may have come
about in this way, and I suggest the translation of the original
news report is checked.


3) A PERSONAL OPINION

It is possible that all or just a part of the story is true.
Official denials prove nothing for truths can be just as
strongly denied as falsehoods. It certainly seems more than mere
coincidence that the remains of the beings described in the
original reports (if such remains ever existed) fit the usual
�alien' profile so well, especially in light of the strong
�little men' tradition throughout Asia. However, so little proof
has been forthcoming to support the story that it would be
inappropriate to jump to any conclusions at this stage. The
subject of UFOs is so steeped in disinformation and error that
many years may still have to pass before the truth is finally
revealed, if, of course, there exists any truth to be revealed.
I hope that anyone attempting to shed any more light on the
elusive discs of Bayan-Khara Uula will at least separate the
tale of Karyl Robin-Evans from the �original' story of the 1938
expedition. In any case, and judging by the enormous popularity
that both cases have achieved in the Net, I expect the
immortality of Karyl Robin-Evans and Tsum Um Nui is as
guaranteed as that of Churchward and his Tablets and Lobsang
Rampa and his Toolbox.


POSTSCRIPT:EXTRATERRESTRIAL FOSSILS IN THE GOBI DESERT?

In June 1996, in fact not long after giving up on finding any
hard data on the alleged 1938 discovery, I read a report in a
Spanish magazine about certain "extraterrestrial fossils" that
had supposedly been found beneath the sands of the Gobi desert.
My efforts to trace this new information to its original source
failed miserably and I soon realised it was very unlikely there
was any substance to it at all. However, for the sake of
thoroughness and as a kind of �postscript' to the Baian-
Kara-Ula case, the following is a translation of the short
article:

Extraterrestrial Fossils?

Mongolian ufologists have announced that, underneath the Gobi
desert, in an area rich in dinosaur remains, Chinese and North
American scientists are concealing the existence of
extraterrestrial bodies. The investigators claim that the bodies
were photographed by palaeontologists. Among the remains there
was a being measuring 1.20 metres in height, with a





                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                  Re Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:37:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:33:51 -0400
Subject: Re Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:59:16 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:25:46 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

 >Nope, twice is not all. I selected those two items because they
 >couldn't be blamed on Birnes or anyone else. We have the tape
 >with them coming out of his mouth. And, if you think lying about
 >his rank is unimportant, then you are mistaken. That is a court
 >martial offense. Besides, the point isn't about the relative
 >importance of the lies, but the fact that he did lie.

My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
important but that there seems to be some confusion about
whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken. I
know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
confusion over this? I don't know. Phil Jr. stated that his
father did have a command at White Sands and that they had
documentation for this. Birnes also saw this proof. My feeling
is that this confusion is a red herring to keep folks from
reading and seriously considering the content of the 'Day After
Roswell'. But I confess I don't have the answer. All I know is
that Col. Corso was the person he said he was and I have much
independent proof for this. I first learned of Col. Corso eight
years ago when I was conducting research on the Kennedy
assassination. Corso did play a prominent role in that
investigation. and is mentioned as a major player by Dick
Russell, the author of 'The Man Who Knew Too Much'. Of course
this was six years before the publication of the 'Day After
Roswell', so when I learned about Col. Corso's intention to
write a book about his dumping alien debris on the business
community, I was very interested. I had one of the first copies
and believe I wrote the first review on the web.

I had also learned of Col. Corso's involvement with the MIA
problem both in Korea and Viet Nam as well. While his stories
may seem fanciful, there is considerable evidence to back his
claims.

 >And, no, I haven't forgotten about this article because it was
 >the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the reason that I
 >told Schmitt that I didn't want to work with him any more. I
 >could tolerate the lies about his occupation, his education and
 >even his allegations that I was a government agent, but when he
 >managed to get me labeled a liar in a national magazine, that
 >was it.

Your explanation is fine with me. I didn't bring this up to
embarrass you but only to show how easy it is to take a bit of
information here and another bit from there and add them up so
they give a false impression. That's what you've done with both
Col. Corso and Ray Santilli. You put them both in the same bag
by saying they lied on one occasion so they must be lying on all
occasions. I don't understand why you can't see this. It
happened to you, right? Are you basically honest and do you try
to tell the truth? I think you do and I disagree with much of
what you write. So if I can cut you this slack, why don't you
revisit both the AA and Col. Corso, give them another careful
look and then decide if you may have rushed to judgment. Both
Santilli and Corso have much to contribute and perhaps the best
evidence the UFO community possesses. Lets do something with
what we have.

 >Of course he made mistakes, but he also lied about many things.

He did not lie about many things. His stories may be
unbelievable but they are not lies and you have no proof that
they are.

 >You had asked for examples, and I supplied two. You then suggest
 >that we all lie and we shouldn't disregard Corso's message
 >because of his lies.

Everyone lies at one time or another. I don't think your
examples qualify as lies. He says he was a commander and both
Birnes and his son say this was true. If there are no official
records for this then something else could be at play. Why not
leave the subject open until we can prove it one way or another?

 >But, it is for those very reasons that we
 >should reject Corso's story.

McCarthy implies that you are a liar. Is that reason to reject
everything else you have to say?

 >That, and his tale that he shut
 >down the radars at White Sands so that the aliens he had met in
 >a cave could escape without detection, and his tale about Nazi
 >time travel machines mentioned at the end of the Dateline
 >interview.

You have no proof that this didn't happen. It seems far fetched
but we're dealing with aliens. Anything is possible, even time
travel.

 >You seem to have forgotten that Senator Thurmond was angry about
 >the introduction because Corso had pulled the old bait and
 >switch on him. Thurmond demanded the introduction be pulled
 >because the book wasn't the one Corso had said that he was going
 >to write. What does that say about the integrity of the man?

Sorry, but the above is not true. Please read the Birnes
interview. Besides it wasn't Strom but his staff who made the
denial and they didn't deny that Col. Corso and Senator Thurmond
were good friends, but only that he didn't understand the nature
of the book. The forward is a paean to Col. Corso and was meant
to show everyone that this was a man who could be trusted.
Obviously it didn't work.

 >Only because people like Corso and Greer manage to undo
 >everything we have accomplished. Takes five or ten years to
 >establish some credibility and only five or ten minutes to undo
 >it.

Au contraire. The reason that the UFO community is in such
disarray is the lack of respect we give legitimate witness,
and our inability to understand and process the information
we already possess.

By the way, why have you never announced to the community that
the so called nurse's story is not true and that Glen Dennis is
being deceptive. It was through Dennis that we learned that the
Roswell aliens had only four digits on each hand. Since this is
the only verification for this information, isn't the actual
number of digits still up for discussion. I've know that Dennis
was being deceptive for several months. He failed a VSA along





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 20

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:37:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:10:57 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

<snip>

 >>www.brumac.8k.com

 >>and read down the opening page until you find reference to Case
 >>10 (the first listed sighting on the web page) and click on
 >>Rogue River.

 > >Should work.

- - - - - -

 >I finally got onto your pages. The site looks very nice, but
 >when I tried to input my personal observations, I got some
 >feedback indicating further problems.

 >I really like the Maccabee photo however, it shows what a master
 >of photography you truly are! You almost look like you don't
 >need a rug.

The only rug I need is a magic carpet... one of the round ones.
I have been able to send messages to myself from the web site,
so I don;t know what the problem is.

But of course the main point is not the rug or the feedback
mechanism: the real point is the sighting itself and the
supporting documentation... which, so far as I know, is the
totality of information available on that sighting.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                         Re: The Legend of the Dropa

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:00:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 09:21:36 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa


 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: The Legend of the Dropa

 >Hello List Members,

 >Having spent the weekend exploring the net and my archives (and
 >raiding other people's � thanks, everyone, for your letters!), I
 >have reached a point in my research that I doubt I can go beyond
 >without some kind of major breakthrough. Below is a synthesis of
 >what I consider to be the most relevant information connected
 >with the case. Like the Alenon hoax we discussed a few months
 >ago, this is another UFO legend that deserves to rest in peace.
 >Unlike Alenon, however, there just may be _something_ real
 >hidden behind so much silliness.

 >1) THE LEGEND OF THE DROPA

<snipped>

Erich Von Daniken (be not quick with a reflexive sneer...) wrote
in "Gods From Outer Space (1970 pp96-98)" the following
regarding the Dropa...

...Appended to the end of the quoted Von Daniken is my own
treatment, from last year and found on the Jeff Rense site under
the title of "The Feathers of Paranormal Birds"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...Kassenzev mostly talked about the remarkable find in the
Chinese mountains of Baian Kara Ula. His story sounded like a
fairy tale.

This is Kassanzev's story:

"It was in 1938 that the Chinese arehaeo1ogist Chi Pu Tei
discovered graves arranged in rows in the mountain caves of
Baian Kara Ula in the Sino-Tibetan border district. He found
small skeletons of beings with delicate frames, who never the
less had rather large skulls. On the walls of the caves he
discovered rock drawings which portrayed beings with round
helmets. The stars, sun, and moon were also scratched on the
rock and connected by groups of pea-sized dots. Ghi Pu Tei and
his assistants managed - and this is the sensational thing about
the find - to salvage seven hundred and sixteen granite plates,
which were two centimeters thick and looked very like our
long-playing records. These stone plates had a hole in the
middle from which a double-grooved incised script ran out
spirally to the edge of the plate. "

"Chinese archaeologists knew that the Dropa and Kham Sikang
tribes had once lived in this deserted region. And
anthropologists said of these mountain tribes that they had been
of small stature, with an average height of only 5 feet 3
inches.... "

"...And how did they get the big skulls ?"

"It was that part of the discovery that upset a previous
anthropological classifications. Scholars could. not place the
high, broad skulls on the tiny skeletons of the Dropa and Kham.
Not with the best will in the world. Then Chi Pu Tei published
his theory in 1940, he met with nothing but scorn. He claimed
that the Dropas and Khams must have been an extinct species of
mountain ape."

"Then how did the stone plates originate? Are the apes supposed
to have made them?"

"Of course not. In Chi Pu Tei's view they were p1aced in the
caves by people from a later culture. On the face of it his
theory did seem rather ridiculous. Who ever heard of rows of
graves made by apes! "

"What happened next? Were the finds filed away in the archives
of unexplained anthropologico-archaeological cases and
forgotten?"

"Very nearly! For twenty years several clever men racked their
brains to solve the riddle of the stone plates. Not until 1962
was Professor Tsum Um Nui of the Academy of Prehistoric Research
in Peking able to decipher parts of the incised script."

"What did they say?"

Kassanzev became serious: "The story that was de- ciphered was
so hair-raising that at first the Academy for Prehistoric
Research forbade Tsum Um Nui to publish his work at all." "And
that was that "Tsum Um Nui is a stubborn fellow; he went on
working doggedly. He could prove without any doubt that the
incised script was not just a bad practical joke by some
authority on prehistoric writing. For even serious scholars
often show a sense of humor. Think of Piltdown man. In
cooperation with geologists he showed that the stone plates had
a high cobalt and metal content. Physicists found out that all
seven hundred and sixteen plates had a high vibration rhythm,
which led to the conclusion that they had been exposed to very
high voltages at some time."

Kassanzev turned off from Kropotkinskaya Quay and drove to the
curb of Volkhonka Street. The car stopped outside the Pushkin
Museum. I was so entranced by his story that I wanted to hear
the rest of it standing an the pavement, but Kassanzev took me
by the arm and led me into the museum. We sat on a bench between
tall glass cases. "Please go on"! "Tsum Um Nui now had four
scientists who supported his theory. In 1963, he decided to
publish it in spite of the Academy's doubts. I have heard that
his publication was known to you in the West, but was not taken
seriously. Over here, too, only a few courageous scholars took
any notice of the stone-plate theory. Very recently our
philologist Dr. Vyatcheslav Saizev published extracts from the
stone-plate story in the periodical Sputnik. The whole story is
preserved in the Peking Academy and the historical archives of
Taipeh in Formosa."

"What is so explosive and shocking about the stone- plate
story?"

"The story is only upsetting and bizarre to people who are
unwilling to face things that may throw new light on our origin.
The stone-plate story says that twelve thousand years ago,
reckoned from today, a group of their people had crashed onto
the third plan- et of this system. Their aircraft - that is an
exact trans- lation of the groove hieroglyphs - had no longer
had enough power to leave this world again. They had been
destroyed in the remote and inaccessible moun- tains. There had
been no means and materials for building new aircraft."

"Is all that written on the stone plates?"

'Yes, and then we are told that these beings who hhd crashed
onto the earth had tried to make friends with the inhabitants of
the mountains, but had been hunted down and killed. The story
ends a1most liter- ally: 'Men, women, and children hid
themselves in the caves until sunset. Then they believed the
sign and saw that the others had come with peaceful intentions
this time....' That's more or less how it ends."

"Is there anything else that corroborates the con- tents of the
stone-plate story?"

"There are the graves in rows, the rock drawings, and the plates
themselves. And there are also the Chinese sagas which precisely
in the Baian Kara Ula region tell of small spindly yellow beings
who came down from the clouds. The myth goes on to say that the
alien creatures were shunned by the Dropas be- cause of their
ugliness, indeed that they were killed by the men in "the quick
way."

"Kassanzev, why isn't this fascinating story dis- cussed all
over the world?" Is it really well enough known?"

My companion laughed, put his hand on my arm and said with mild
resignation: "Here in Moscow the story is known, you only need
to keep your ears open. But the story contains too many facts
which cannot be slotted straight into the painfully constructed
chronology of archaeology and anthropology. Authorities who
attach importance to their reputation in the scientific world
would have to abandon a great deal of their own theories if they
were to take serious notice of Baian Kara Ula. Surely it is very
human to take the easy way out - to keep silent or laugh
discreetly and condescendingly? When recognized scientists stick
together and smile or say nothing, the boldest man loses
enthusiasm in a subject that is too hot to handle." I am still
too young to be able to resign myself. I believe in the
disturbing power of ideas that cannot be hushed up."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Feathers of Paranormal Birds

High in Chinese mountains and on the border with Tibet, a team
of archeologists were conducting digs, it's said. The routine
exploration of a set of linking caves was detailed and
scientific - when they came upon some graves. The graves,
arranged so neatly, were to yield what portends... yet another
haunting mystery - did it happen? Something did.

The graves gave up their contents, and the men just stood
aghast. Their mouths were hanging open for credulity was cast!
Within these graves the bones were 'strange' - perhaps some kind
of ape?!? The heads too large, the bones too small, and tiny
(?!) - how they gaped! "Ape men" was a silly stretch, these
scientists were seasoned - what kind of ape will BURY dead? They
HAD to come to reason.

And then it was they found the 'stones', and what 'ape' crafted
these? Tiny hieroglyphics spun in spirals one could see. How
like a "stone age gramophone", they thought, and were to say,
but that was nineteen thirty-eight, and this is present day.
Twelve thousand years had passed to dust from times too dark and
fabled. The disks of stone were ancient, too explicably
mislabeled. Even those who had them had no clue what they were
for - dismissed as cultish objects, they are locked in Chinese
drawers.

The plates resemble records that a 'caveman' would have played,
a big hole in the center and the spiraled tight display. The
glyphs display like feathers of a paranormal bird as they fan
imagination in the way that they've been curved. There's
nothing, then, quite like the way that they were crafted out.
There is the plate of Lollidof (another Dropa shout?), which
could be serendipity if there is a GRAIN of truth, but this just
won't be talked about, so some can stay aloof.

For YEARS the disks are studied, and they vex the greatest
minds. The Chinese keep it to themselves not knowing what
they'll find. They are so 'strangely' puzzled; it's compelling,
so bizarre, 'till finally they DO crack it (?), and we see just
where we are. The contents are so shattering, tumultuous, and
sincere that the lid is clamped upon them and they're silenced
out of fear! Ridiculed, at present, by our sacrosanct 'elite',
these are stories that inflame the mind, but for SOME demand
retreat.

Dr. Tsum (?) (our brave code breaker) likely opted for
discussion. He saw the different paradigms in a burst of light's
concussion? For years he argues quietly (he would fear the
prison camp?), but then Peking decided. They would light that
secret's lamp! The year, by now, was sixty-five, and I was still
in school; a green-eared lad of fifteen years, a sophomore... a
fool <g>. But I remember vaguely in a paper from a friend...
which spoke of Chinese UFOs - that "Dropa" word again. And today
in nineteen ninety-nine, I see that word once more, and the
story (plus some pictures!) rather put me through the floor.

It WAS twelve thousand years ago, and from the trackless sky...
descends a 'ship' in trouble - call it fable, myth, or lie. They
land, contact the people, called the Ham (they lived in caves).
They are slaughtered for their trouble, and so end their hapless
days. They're hunted down on horseback, "gaunt and yellow" - not
like men. Their 'ugliness' transcends belief - hated
'strangers'... sans some friends. Some must live to make it
known that they are quite sincere, have peaceful, kind
intentions - and are really not that queer. They mix genetic
'essence' with the people of the Ham. Those folks, today (?) -
anomalous, unexplained... a mystery, Sam. The "plates"? They're
still the mystery, their construction isn't plain. Containing
too much cobalt, and by 'wattage' marked and stained. Electrical
components would be "scarred" in such a way, and the plates have
'other' properties. They hum when spun some say. In sum a scary
story, or a message from the past, but if true - "we're not IN
Kansas", and the secret's out at last.

Just another cruel enigma, wrapped in years of crass denial? The
plates contest 'reality', so a look is not worthwhile? And we
don't look, we ridicule, and mock, or smirk - or worse, we're
back-step dancing shufflers - it's no blessing; it's a curse. A
curse of shallow sightlessness, and a waste of useful talent, a
choice for all the worst ideas - the short view's wasteful
challenge. But for them we'd live... tall lives in space... in
constructs that we made, respecting 'individuals', and the teams
that they would make! Satisfaction so achievable that it's in
the air you breath, respect that's so forthcoming you can chew
it with your teeth. Freedom that's decided as the common right
of birth, education's focus is "you make your 'own' choice",
Burt! You're given information which might change the way you
feel, and you buy in, the choice is yours.... you strike an
honored deal.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Pronounced 'drohzz-pa'.

Restore John Ford.


~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND - John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is - the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by scurrilous
skepti-bunkies.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 20:42:49 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 09:24:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:37:08 -0500

 >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:39:12 -0000

 >>Dennis,

 >>You might be amazed as to how much I agree with your "cynical"
 >>appraisal of trying to get Congress to act, and my view is based
 >>on having lived in and around Washington, D.C., for over 40
 >>years, working for Congressional Information Service (12 years),
 >>and interacting with lots of VIPs. Which is more than probably
 >>98% of the people on this list can say. For an "outside the
 >>Beltway" observer, you are well on target.

 >Dick,

 >I thank you and my family thanks you! And, no, I'm not amazed that
 >we agree on something.

 >>However, to the best of my knowledge Rockefeller did not target
 >>Congress; the "Best Evidence" was targeted to news media moguls
 >>and corporate chiefs; with (as far as I know) invisible
 >>"results."

 >My mistake. Different targets, same results. That is,
 >practically nil. I suspect Bigelow's distribution of the Roper
 >Report, which you didn't address, racked up similar results.

 >>I totally agree with you that Congressional hearings are not in
 >>the cards, unless outside events occur that force the issue. In
 >>fact, I think Greer (if anything) succeeded in making hearings
 >>even less likely than they may have been before.

 >We agree once again. But where are you coming from with this
comment, >since you don't seem to think there is anything there
worth >investigating in the first place?

 >>Dick

 >Uh, I'm not sure what you mean by this last statement. Could you
 >elucidate, based on my own comments?

Dennis,

You certainly suggest over and over that "visitors" are unlikely
because..., and human witnesses are fallible, so why bother.
This obviously is my shorthand expression for your skepticism. I
don't see you out there leading the charge for a more thorough
scientific investigation.

 >Or maybe I can turn the tables. Which aspects of ufology do you
 >think should be investigated by science, and which ones should
 >be investigated by Congress?

(a) Science: the accumulated data;
(b) Congress: Government secrecy and cover-up issues.

 >Do I think there is a massive government UFO cover up in place a
 >la MJ-12, capable of being revealed by Congressional
 >investigation? Yes, I don't. (Which would pretty much, ipso
 >facto, tank Roswell, wouldn't it? A case that you, CUFOS, and
 >the coalition just can't give up on.)

"Can't give up on" expresses to me an accusation that gullible
belief (rather than suspended judgment) is at work. Many known
witnesses have yet to be interviewed. I don't know whether there
is a "massive" cover-up either, but I don't rule out the
possibility, and we won't know until there is a thorough-going
investigation.

 >Do I think one in forty Americans have been abducted? Yes, I
 >don't. Do you?

I don't know the numbers and am aware that the Roper Poll is
flawed, according to knowledgable people, but I do know that
hundreds or thousands of people have experienced "abduction"
(whatever that is).

 >Do you think Hopkins and Jacobs have a lock-grip on same?

I have no idea what you mean by this. Lock-grip?

 >If so, what should we do about it?

 >Assume all your UFO wishes come true. Then what? Will
 >tomorrow be any different from today?

 >Dennis

Once again, I have no idea what you are talking about here, or
what sort of question this is (or purports to be). What are my
"UFO wishes" and what do they have to do with anything? I wish
the damn things had never shown up and dominated my life, mostly
for ill. Does that answer your question? If not, please rephrase
it and I'll try again.


Dick








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:15:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:37:57 -0700


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:59:16 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:25:46 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

 >>Nope, twice is not all. I selected those two items because they
 >>couldn't be blamed on Birnes or anyone else. We have the tape
 >>with them coming out of his mouth. And, if you think lying about
 >>his rank is unimportant, then you are mistaken. That is a court
 >>martial offense. Besides, the point isn't about the relative
 >>importance of the lies, but the fact that he did lie.

 >My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
 >important but that there seems to be some confusion about
 >whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken. I
 >know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
 >confusion over this? I don't know.

Well, I feel that I am entitled to be a general, so I'll just
adopt that rank from here on in. Nope. This doesn't wash.

 >Phil Jr. stated that his
 >father did have a command at White Sands and that they had
 >documentation for this.

Yep, had A command, not THE command, which is what he said in
July 1947.

<snip>

 >>And, no, I haven't forgotten about this article because it was
 >>the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the reason that I
 >>told Schmitt that I didn't want to work with him any more. I
 >>could tolerate the lies about his occupation, his education and
 >>even his allegations that I was a government agent, but when he
 >>managed to get me labeled a liar in a national magazine, that
 >>was it.

 >Your explanation is fine with me. I didn't bring this up to
 >embarrass you but only to show how easy it is to take a bit of
 >information here and another bit from there and add them up so
 >they give a false impression. That's what you've done with both
 >Col. Corso and Ray Santilli. You put them both in the same bag
 >by saying they lied on one occasion so they must be lying on all
 >occasions.

Nope, they've lied on multiple occasions. Santilli said that the
tent footage was a hoax. He changed the cameraman's statement
after it was pointed out that it was not an American "voice," he
had those crazy security classifications that he showed until
those with the knowledge said such classifications never
existed... and so on. Not one lie but multiple lies.

 >I don't understand why you can't see this. It
 >happened to you, right? Are you basically honest and do you try
 >to tell the truth? I think you do and I disagree with much of
 >what you write. So if I can cut you this slack, why don't you
 >revisit both the AA and Col. Corso, give them another careful
 >look and then decide if you may have rushed to judgment. Both
 >Santilli and Corso have much to contribute and perhaps the best
 >evidence the UFO community possesses. Lets do something with
 >what we have.

Neither Santilli nor Corso have anything to contribute. I have
looked at all of this carefully. Don't you think I would want it
to be true because it would verify my statements that something
extraterrestrial crashed at Roswell. However, I have examined
these statements carefully and when I find problems, I'm going
to point them out. I'm not going to allow these people to insult
my intelligence by climbing on their bandwagons.

 >>Of course he made mistakes, but he also lied about many things.

 >He did not lie about many things. His stories may be
 >unbelievable but they are not lies and you have no proof that
 >they are.

More to the point, Corso has no proof that they are true. We're
just supposed to believe them because he said so.

<snip>

 >McCarthy implies that you are a liar. Is that reason to reject
 >everything else you have to say?

McCarthy implies this, but then he has no proof. He claims that
both Schmitt and I admitted that we had fabricated the missing
nurse story, but McCarthy is mistaken. I never said any such a
thing.  Should we reject Schmitt? Yes. But not just because
McCarthy said so. Should we reject me, because McCarthy said so?
No. Not without proof.

 >>That, and his tale that he shut
 >>down the radars at White Sands so that the aliens he had met in
 >>a cave could escape without detection, and his tale about Nazi
 >>time travel machines mentioned at the end of the Dateline
 >>interview.

 >You have no proof that this didn't happen. It seems far fetched
 >but we're dealing with aliens. Anything is possible, even time
 >travel.

More to the point, you have no proof that it did.

 >>You seem to have forgotten that Senator Thurmond was angry about
 >>the introduction because Corso had pulled the old bait and
 >>switch on him. Thurmond demanded the introduction be pulled
 >>because the book wasn't the one Corso had said that he was going
 >>to write. What does that say about the integrity of the man?

 >Sorry, but the above is not true. Please read the Birnes
 >interview. Besides it wasn't Strom but his staff who made the
 >denial and they didn't deny that Col. Corso and Senator Thurmond
 >were good friends, but only that he didn't understand the nature
 >of the book. The forward is a paean to Col. Corso and was meant
 >to show everyone that this was a man who could be trusted.
 >Obviously it didn't work.

Sorry, but it is true. I've read Birnes on the subject. Have you
read Pflock, who talked to the senator's staff?

<snip>

 >By the way, why have you never announced to the community that
 >the so called nurse's story is not true and that Glen Dennis is
 >being deceptive. It was through Dennis that we learned that the
 >Roswell aliens had only four digits on each hand. Since this is
 >the only verification for this information, isn't the actual
 >number of digits still up for discussion. I've know that Dennis
 >was being deceptive for several months. He failed a VSA along
 >with McGovern.

Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
by him, me maybe more so than others.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:08:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:17:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 23:53:08 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy

 >Has it ever occurred to you that you're being had not so much by
 >the likes of Armitage as by the likes of Corso, Birnes, and
 >Greer?

Dennis,

"Being had" isn't what I would call it. I've carefully
researched both the AA and 'The Day After Roswell' and come to
the conclusion that their version of events is closer to reality
than your interpretation of these same events. I disagree with
Dr. Greer's assessment of the alien threat and think his tactics
are a bit over the top, but I'm willing to wait and see and not
sit back and condemn.

 >I've read Corso's book, and if you'll pardon the expression,
 >it's unaldulterated crap from start to finish.

I know, and the AA is a piece of crap, and blah, blah blah!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                     CCCRN News: New Network Assistants

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:55:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:21:00 -0400
Subject: CCCRN News: New Network Assistants


CCCRN NEWS
The E-News Service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

May 20, 2001

_____________________________


NEW NETWORK ASSISTANTS

CCCRN is pleased to welcome a new coordinator for the province
of Nova Scotia (our seventh province!) and several new field
research assistants in BC and Alberta. Contact info is in the
Contacts section on the web site:

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.html

(Note: some additional contact information for provincial
coordinators and field research assistants is kept confidential
and may be made available at times if necessary for
investigative purposes to other assistants and researchers
only).

Reports of formations can be made to any of the provincial
branches or to the main office.


Penelope Ramirez - Coordinator
Bedford, Nova Scotia

Penelope has an extensive background in media - a former
researcher and producer for CBC Television (including
'Newsworld', 'Current Affairs' and documentaries for the
Department of Agriculture and Resources) and editorial assistant
for Global Television News as well as other freelance writing;
she can travel to locations in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island
and New Brunswick.


Anne Pope - Field Research Assistant (Field Studies/Sampling)
Calgary, Alberta

Anne is a sculptor and a former museum exhibition designer in
the fields of geology and paleontology (including the Provincial
Museum of Alberta, the Muttart Conservatory, the University of
Alberta Department of Paleontology, the Alberta Museums
Association and the Alberta Research Council). She also worked
for Economic Development and Tourism as an art consultant in the
central Arctic. She has deep country roots, growing up on a
ranch at Pine Lake.


Malvina Maruska - Field Research Assistant (Field
Studies/Sampling) Calgary, Alberta

Malvina is a former registered nurse who has travelled to
various sacred sites around the world; she also brings a
background knowledge of sacred geometry to the research pool.


Bob Oulton - Field Research Assistant (Aerial Photography)
Airdrie, Alberta

Bob brings needed assistance in obtaining aerial photographs of
formations using a form of ultralight; he can travel to
locations in both Alberta and Saskatchewan.


Gordon Plowman - Field Research Assistant (Field
Studies/Sampling) Calgary, Alberta

Gordon is a former farmer with extensive outdoors related
experience. Gordon also related a report of three large 60'
circles at Pipestone, Manitoba, from 1951! No pics,
unfortunately. He also heard of others in the same time period,
but no one was familiar with crop circles then so they were
mostly just ignored.


Brian Vike - Field Research Assistant (Field Studies/Sampling)
Houston, BC

Brian runs the excellent HBCC UFO Research group in northern BC
and has generously lended his assistance to CCCRN, although
formations in that region, even in grass, are few.


Valodya Chernencoff - Field Research Assistant (Field
Studies/Sampling) Kamloops, BC

Valodya brings his knowledge of radionics and dowsing to the
network.


____________________________


The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is a non-profit
organization which investigates the crop circle phenomenon and
possibly related phenomena in Canada, creating a liason between
researchers, farmers, the public, the media and scientists in
trying to solve this ongoing enigma


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH NETWORK

Main Office:
Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

Provincial Branches:
http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.html


� Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

               Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:23:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:27:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto - Hatch


 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:03:13 -0400
 >From: Kelly <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

 >>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 06:04:19 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Nick Balaskas on City TV - Toronto

<snip>

 >>Amazing. One whole broadcast without a single mention of the
 >>"little green men" which were never credibly reported in the
 >>first place.

 >Really! Everyone knows that they are grey, or greyish, or
 >reptilian. My major concern with UFO occupants is that spiders
 >and I don't get along too well and if Storm Trooper bugs ever
 >decide to invade Earth then I will kill them with abandon. Bugs
 >bring out a horrible side of me. You wouldn't want to know me.

 >>How long did it take? Half a century?

 >For what? Maybe!

 >>Still amazing, even for Canada with its high broadcasting
 >>standards.

 >Ha! The media, politicans and business all sleep in one big,
 >soggy bed. It's disgusting.

 >>One talk show host even interviewed Larry Hatch, (that's me
 >>believe it or not) while the States were booming with Art Bell
 >>types. Testimony no doubt to their high lasagna and good taste

 >What does that mean? Do they put drugs in lasagna in the states?

 >>I hope I wasn't a complete bore.

 >You're never boring Larry! You're very funny. Well, I think I
 >have bothered Errol and the List enough tonight! I should tell
 >one of my UFO stories as an act of penance! Hummmmmmm. However,
 >I think I will go and look for my old cheerleading outfit
 >instead! Thanks for the idea!

Thanks Kelly.

Enough beer and I start repeating myself however.

I like lasagna, and that pops up sometimes when I can't find
some word I'm really looking for.

Yes, the greys etc. are what people actually report. The news
types however don't know this after decades now, and forever
drag out the "little green men. for a flogging. Its refreshing
when that doesn't happen.


Best!

- Larry Hatch










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

             Civilian To Purchase Seat Aboard First Manned Mars

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 19:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:03:20 -0400
Subject: Civilian To Purchase Seat Aboard First Manned Mars


The Manned Mars Mission Initiative
c/o Mac Tonnies
105 Ward Parkway #900
Kansas City, MO 64112
(816) 561-0190
email: macbot@yahoo.com

5-21-2001
For Immediate Release
CIVILIAN TO PURCHASE SEAT ABOARD FIRST MANNED MARS
MISSION

Kansas City, MO -- A 25-year old writer living in Kansas City
has announced his intention to be a member of the first manned
mission to Mars, expected by many to be underway by 2020.

Mac Tonnies, who maintains a website devoted to future Mars
exploration, maintains that there are no convincing technical
reasons why at least one civilian "tourist" cannot be
incorporated into a manned mission to the Red Planet, especially
if he or she is able to help underwrite mission costs.

While NASA has recently come forward in favor of space tourism
(granted that proposed tourists comply to the agency's
guidelines) activities have so far been confined to Earth orbit
aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Tonnies perceives
no ideological hurdle from a six-day stay aboard the ISS and a
jaunt to Mars.

Although the Mars mission schedule is likely to include a
two-year stay on our neighbor world, Tonnies is undaunted. "The
United States, acting in partnership with foreign space
agencies, is in a much better position to send people to Mars
now, technologically and financially, than it was for the Apollo
flights," he says.

The real hurdle is money, Tonnies acknowledges. He plans to
surmount this using a novel form of Internet-based "pledging,"
whereby corporations and philanthropists can flaunt advertising
over the course of the Mars mission in order to finance his
personal life support, equipment, and living space, both aboard
the Mars-bound craft and on the Martian surface.

His organization, the Manned Mars Mission Initiative (3MI), is
currently preparing an electronic media campaign to raise
awareness.

end








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                      Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:06:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch


 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:10:57 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 ><snip>

 >>>www.brumac.8k.com

 >>>and read down the opening page until you find reference to Case
 >>>10 (the first listed sighting on the web page) and click on
 >>>Rogue River.

 >>>Should work.

 >- - - - - -

 >>I finally got onto your pages. The site looks very nice, but
 >>when I tried to input my personal observations, I got some
 >>feedback indicating further problems.

 >>I really like the Maccabee photo however, it shows what a master
 >>of photography you truly are! You almost look like you don't
 >>need a rug.

 >The only rug I need is a magic carpet... one of the round ones.
 >I have been able to send messages to myself from the web site,
 >so I don;t know what the problem is.

 >But of course the main point is not the rug or the feedback
 >mechanism: the real point is the sighting itself and the
 >supporting documentation... which, so far as I know, is the
 >totality of information available on that sighting.


Hello Bruce:

Oh good heavens! Did I send that stupid stuff to the List? (Must
have spilled beer into the keyboard.)

Sorry!! I'm going to try the feedback page again,
chances are I screwed that up too.

As for Rogue River, I consider that a very interesting sighting
indeed. I list it as NE/Gold Beach since the river is fairly
long .. and have it at 124:23W - 42:27N which should be close.

A sophisticated hoax? That's a little hard to feature. One
scientist might pull off a carefully engineered hoax just to
embarrass another one, but _five_ scientists on a fishing trip?

I tried to pull in the relevant page of yours again, but
again I got a 404 error:

  404 Error - File Not Found
  The page or file you are looking for
  http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.
  Possible Reasons:
  You may have spelled the URL incorrectly.
  This site may have been removed due to a violation
  of yadda yadda or moved to a different server.

I tried http://brumac.8k.com, and that came in fine again.
"Rogue" was easily located, but when I clicked on that, I got
the very same 404-error. I also experimented with
/rogueriver.html and variants.

Anyhow, my source is NICAP UFO Investigator, Vol.1 #3, which
must be only the third issue of that venerable work. I estimated
coordinates from that description and an old map. My take on the
object is of a 35-ft metallic disk/saucer craft with a fin on
the rear, traveling NNE at the speed of a jet plane.

My other (listed) source is Loren Gross, UFOs a History -1949
(first of three 1949 books, pg 76. )

About the only weakness I see is the implied brevity of the
sighting. At jet speed, the scientists may not have gotten a
very good look at it, although they did note the
uncharacteristic fin at the rear!

An interesting case nonetheless, easily neglected while people
bat the Trent photos and Lonnie Zamora back and forth. The area
is sparsely populated even now, and might represent one of many
nice places for a UFO to come in over the coast, at high speed,
and usually unseen. People who like maps like to look for little
things like that.


Best wishes and humble apologies [burp]

- Larry Hatch

Now I gotta get a cold one and think this all over.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:39:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:08:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:14:30 +1200

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 01:43:45 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Never mind that fact that
 >>Birnes claims that the book is Corso. Then you had Corso's son
 >>who was going to release the "actual" Corso story that was
 >>written with his own hand as opposed to being Birnesized.

 >Robert,

 >Do you have any other information re Corso's sons story...
 >release, title, publisher etc?


Hi William,

Corso's son put up a web site called Corsofiles.com last year.
In the web site they had a teaser of Corso revelations, also
subscribe to the newsletter and get the inside scoop blah blah.
It was on that web site that Corso or his son allegedly made the
comment that by 2003 the US would be at the same technological
state as the ET's were in 1947.

Around the middle of December last year the Corsofiles.com
vanished because of an alleged contractual dispute between Corso
Jr and whom ever his financial backers were.

I always found it interesting that the web site that was going
to expose the revelation of the century rolled over, died, and
has yet to be ressurected.

Corso Jr  had a PDF file of Chapter 1 of Seniors  new book on
the web site as well. That was going to lead on to various
other chapters, disclosures and so on.  Hasn't happened yet.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:45:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:12:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:37:57 -0700

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:59:16 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:25:46 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

 >>Nope, twice is not all. I selected those two items because they
 >>couldn't be blamed on Birnes or anyone else. We have the tape
 >>with them coming out of his mouth. And, if you think lying about
 >>his rank is unimportant, then you are mistaken. That is a court
 >>martial offense. Besides, the point isn't about the relative
 >>importance of the lies, but the fact that he did lie.

 >My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
 >important but that there seems to be some confusion about
 >whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken.

Ed:

Have you ever been in the military? Could you offer a theory
about how one is confused or mistaken about one's rank, or
whether he had excercized a specific command or not?

 >I know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
 >confusion over this? I don't know.

The issue is not whether he felt entitled to it, but whether he
had ever been promoted to that rank. Corso claimed, in writing
when he signed his name in the type of signature block which is
used by more senior retired officers, that he was a retired full
Colonel. You are the one who seems confused; I don't know why,
but I can guess.

<snip>

 >All I know is that Col. Corso was the person he said he was
 >and I have much independent proof for this. I first learned of
 >Col. Corso eight years ago when I was conducting research
 >on the Kennedy assassination.

<snip>

 >when I learned about Col. Corso's intention to write a book
 >about his dumping alien debris on the business
 >community, I was very interested.

<snip>

 >I had also learned of Col. Corso's involvement with the MIA
 >problem both in Korea and Viet Nam as well. While his stories
 >may seem fanciful, there is considerable evidence to back his
 >claims.

 >That's what you've done with both Col. Corso and Ray Santilli.
 >You put them both in the same bag by saying they lied on
 >one occasion so they must be lying on all occasions.

<snip>

 >and Col. Corso

<snip>

 >Everyone lies at one time or another. I don't think your
 >examples qualify as lies. He says he was a commander and both
 >Birnes and his son say this was true. If there are no official
 >records for this then something else could be at play.

This demonstrates the lengths that you seem ready to go to
continue to prop up this man's fantastic BS about flying saucers
and his own imagined role in saving the World.

 >Why not leave the subject open until we can prove it one way
 >or another?

This statement cannot be taken seriously, except as an indication
of the fixation of your beliefs. If you want evidence of what is
wrong with UFOlogy, this is a fine example, no other supporting
documentation is needed.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:14:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:28:08 -0500 (CDT)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began

 >>... large glowing structured (disc-like) object ...
 >>... making a humming sound.

 >>... continuing to lluminate the ground via an inverted cone of
 >>... light (narrower at the bottom) from its underside.

 >>... As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >>... jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >>"... straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >This jury member suggests Bob is guilty of deliberately ignoring
 >wholesale evidence to the contrary. He should be sentenced to
 >writing on the blackboard 500 times:

 >* Venus is not disk-shaped

Please look at a bright, distant light and tell me exactly what
shape it assumes. If you say, "round", you are not looking
closely.

 >* Venus does not hum

What evidence is there that the humming reported by witnesses
was caused by the distant UFO?

 > * Venus does not emit inverted light cones

See the comment, above, re the shape of Venus.

 > * Venus does not zoom straight up and disappear
 > when Air Force jets approach

Except when Venus disappears with growing daylight at
about the time planes arrive. This claim is virtually identical
to one I once recieved about Jupiter.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:17:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Incidentally, I had direct communications from a scientist of
 >the Kuwait scientific organization (ca't recall its name right
 >now). Iraqui aircraft landing in a Kuwait oil field?

Hell, two years later they captured the lot in a few hours.

<snip>

 >>Nor do I have any reason to beleive that they have _actually_
 >>studied _any_ UFO cases on their own. A very short "briefing",
 >>disturbingly similar to the Robertson Panel in 1953, in which
 >>"science" was subservient to public relations.

 >Who's public relations effort do you think this was, and what
 >might have been its purpose?

 >If you have actually read the Robertson Panel report, you will
 >be aware that they were concerned with the popular image of UFOs
 >and trying to debunk it, rather than trying to do any real
 >science, because they feared UFO reports would clog intelligence
 >panels. That is a political-military PR type of activity, not
 >science.

I wasn't referring to the Robertson Panel, but asked who's PR
effort you think the Sturrock Panel's was? Any ideas?

<snip>

 >>If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
 >>meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
 >>states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
 >>virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
 >>area.

 >>As a matter of fact, only a tiny proportion of fireball
 >>meteors are _reported_ at all. They can be visible over a wide
 >>area, if the sky is clear or dark and they are sufficiently
 >>bright and, but whether anyone happens to be looking at that
 >>hour is another matter.

 >Good God! It didn't look like a meteor, it didn't act like a
 >meteor.

Who says? Sound like one to me, and I've seen a bundle of them,
including brilliant green bolides.

 >it was not reported elsewhere as surely a fireball of
 >this magnitude and duration would have been. Ground witnesses
 >saw it hovering near the helicopter and beaming a green light
 >down on the helicopter.

These ground "witnesses" surfaced three years later after
newspaper publicity describing the sighting. According to Phil
Klass, they placed the UFO miles away from the helo.

 >It had visible structure and precisely positioned body lights.

So does a fragmenting fireball. All fragements are "precisely
positioned". Since the object was an unkown, what could this
claim possibly mean?

 >When it departed, it showed a white "taillight" and made a
 >45 degree turn to the right.

As a bright meteor high in the atmosphere (not really near as
assumed) moves away and disappears, it can appear to change
direction. Last November during the Leonids I was lucky enough
to catch a so called "Earth grazer", just as the radiant was
rising in the east. The thing zoomed across the sky and looked
like the afterburner of a jet as it disappeared in the distance.
We're talking about descriptions of unexpected things seen in
seconds. The fireball looks a lot different at it's peak
intensity and when it is nearly burned out, it can look like it
is "zooming away."

 >>This is something of a chicken or egg argument, but at least I
 >>can take you to museums where there are hundreds of beautiful
 >>specimens of UFO/meteors. How many ET spaceship/meteors can
 >>you show me, I'm up for a field trip about now.

 >Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >CUFOS-NICAP files.

Got any saucers there?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:26:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:59:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:14:28 -0700

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 23:58:41 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gates

 >>>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:01:03 +1200

 >Robert, you answer William:

 >>Regardless of what Corso claimed or said, the fact of the matter
 >>was that storys about Russian putting everything from troops to
 >>missiles in cuba were floating around before 1962. In fact some
 >>of they started leaking out of the Cuban exile community after
 >>the Bay of Pigs Fiasco in 61'.

 >Do you have proof for this statement? Have you read Col. Corso's
 >version of these events. Have you read 'The Day After Roswell'?

I have read the Birnesized book 'The Day After Roswell. just
after it came out.

As to the Cuban crisis, why don't you go to the JFK library and
read the thousands of pages of documents that have been released
and declassified, not to mention the 30,000 plus pages of
documents the National Security Archive have about the Crisis.
You can also get copies of the CIA August 62 intel estimates
about the introduction of SAMs and other equipment to cuba. I
also recall that Life or Look did a big article on the refugee
reports in July or August of 62, not to mention various
newspaper articles covering the subject. A US senator was also
very interested in the subject according to the articles.

Point being is that contrary to what the Corso lap dogs claim,
the leaks about the introduction of Soviet military equipment
into cuba went on long before Corso ever fell out of the
woodwork.

 >>>William writes:
 >>>Whether there were stories being circulated or not regarding
 >>>anti-aircraft missiles in Cuba doesn't really make much
 >>>difference. The point being that it seemed to Corso the same lid
 >>>was clamped down on the nukes when the cannisters were
 >>>discovered, in essence forcing his hand.

 >And you answer:
 >>Corso wasn't in the "loop" when the pictures came back
 >>showing the missile cannisters

 >And on what do you base this statement? Col. Corso was in the
 >"loop", as you say. If he wasn't in the "loop" then where was
 >he?

If you check _real_, _actual_ declassified documents about the
cuban crisis you would find that the photos went from NPIC to
the Whitehouse. Corso was not in that loop. Concerning the
Crisis, Corso did not meet with the President, Corso did not
brief anybody, Corso did not sit in with the ExComm meetings as
the White House and so on and so forth. Bottom line is Corso was
not in the loop.

 >Then you write:

 >>He saw the pictures along with everybody else after the crisis
 >>started.

 >And where did you come up with this BS.

You will recall that Stevens released the U-2 photos at the UN.
The only time Corso could have seen the photos was between NPIC
and the White House which was hours rather then days and weeks
in advance.

 >>>As to the Paul Scott story, even if it was true, Scott probably
 >>>did not identify Corso by name.

 >Yes he did William! See Birnes interview

According to Birnes. You may recall their are Birnes problems.

As I recall in a speaking engagement or something in New Mexico,
Corso claimed that Birnes embelished/stroked the book. This is
how Corso explained various problems with the book. On the other
hand Birnes claimed the book was 100 percent Corso true to the
word.

 >Then Robert writes:

 >>Here is the bottom line on Corso and his book. Corso himself
 >>claimed that Birnes stroked the book and material was not
 >>true/correct. Corso's own son has apprently claimed that about
 >>10 percent of the book is "worthwhile" apparently meaning
 >>correct. Obviously the son doesn't believe every word in the
 >>book, nor does he consider it UFO scripture never to be doubted
 >>or questioned.So in essence we have a book that
 >>(being generous) anywhere up to 70-90 percent of the
 >>book is a stroke job.

 >Robert, It sounds as if you know a thing or two about stroke
 >jobs, but I'd like to stop this bit of misinformation right here

Just watched Birnes and Corso!

 >and now. Last night I had an hour conversation with Col. Corso's
 >son, Phil. He was both cordial and informative and never once
 >seemed evasive or less than honest.

So whatever happened to the Corsofiles.com. Is Phil going
to resurrect it or let the whole thing languish?

 >I asked him about the 10% quote and he said folks must have
 >misunderstood what he intended to say. He stated, (and I
 >paraphrase): Only ten percent of what my father had to say was
 >represented by the book. Yes, there were some mistakes but the
 >overall meat and potatoes of the book was absolutely true. My
 >father did exactly what he said he did concerning the alien
 >technology.

Glad you finally admit the book has mistakes in it. Now the
question arises: Which and what exactly in the book is a mistake
and what has been Birnesized?

 >So there you have it. Phil Jr. endorses his father's beliefs
 >100%. "My father never exaggerated or swore."

While his dad may not have, it was alleged that Birnes
exaggerated things in the book.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:32:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:01:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:13:10 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:33:59 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Dick:

 >>Regarding your case #13, The Cash Landrum Case, let's address
 >>the illogic of the incident as evidence for an Extraterrestrial
 >>craft:

 >>2) Where did the 23 helicopters come from? Where were they
 >>based? Who flew them?

 >Very good question, and an integral part of the mystery. The
 >Army Inspector General could not find out where they came from.
 >John Schuessler later developed a reasonable hypothesis that
 >they were from a Navy/military task force in the Gulf of Mexico,
 >which could be the reason why none of the area Army or Air Force
 >bases could account for them.

The Navy's helicopters carriers carry 12 aircraft each, this
would have required two carriers.  Since this was near the
holidays, most units were probably on stand-down. Two carriers
out to sea at this time should be traceable. He's suggesting
mystery fleets tooling around at Christmas and nobody knew?

I don't think that this idea is viable.

<snip>

 >There were dozens of police and other ground witnesses to the
 >helicopters.

The other witnesses reported helicopters at other times during
the night, sometimes hours later. How is this confirmative of
the massive 9 PM formation or the UFO, which was _not_ reported
by these others?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:04:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:13:52 -0400

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:53:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >>system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >>have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >>access to AF UFO files.

 >If true, this would be very good evidence that MJ-12 is not what
 >you believe it to be.

 >If the puppet master can't control the puppet, what is he the
 >master of?


Menzel gained access to Project Blue Book files from another
scientist at Harvard, and used the files to write his first
book. He was not authorized to have these files. Ruppelt
wanted Menzel disciplined, however, the ATIC Commander, Colonel
Dunn nixed the idea. Ruppelt also complained that Menzel
returned the material out of order and scrambled.

[It would seem to me if Menzel were the big MJ-12 guru, that he
could get the cases through other channels and this subterfuge
would not have been necessary. In January 1952, the Air Force
routinely starting send copies of UFO reports to a number of
other government agencies. Opps, MJ-12 isn't listed on the DF.
Maybe they didn't have "a need to know."]

Robert:

Would you agree that this all suggests that Menzel was not a
member of MJ-12?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 21

                 Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:10:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:31:10 -0700

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:31:11 -0300
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

 >>Ed, I was there. I see now why Phil Corso Jr. didn't want the
 >>session taped. He certainly exaggerated by always using Colonel
 >>instead of Lt. Colonel, by claiming not only in a sworn
 >>statement but also on the sales blurb that he was a member of
 >>the NSC which he never was.

 >Let me repeat: Phil Jr. said that he believes that what his
 >father said about the transfer of alien technology is 100% true,
 >but that was only ten percent of the total information his
 >father had to offer. He's sorry there was some confusion.

Just what difference does it make what Phil Corso Jr. believes?
Did he verify anything? Jr. claimed that he had a foot high pile
of documents. I asked if any were classified. He said no. Just
what new light can they shed? Corso Jr. said his dad told him
the saucers couldn't be from far away because of no facilities
for sleeping, eating etc. I had to remind Junior that there were
plenty of reports of huge mother ships, such as the 1996 Yukon
case, the JAL case, etc, so that there was no reason to presume
the saucers came directly on their own from another solar
system. Like small aircraft on big aircraft carriers. Not good
thinking.

 >There were many mistakes and his father went through the book,
 >page by page and highlighted them. The corrections were never
 >made because of litigation. Phil Jr. said the book was rushed by
 >the publishers because they were worried that the government
 >would forbid its publication.

Since there is no classified information in the book, and no
backup for the claims, how could the government forbid
publication? As I understand, it the corrections weren't noted
until after the book was published. I have one list by a full
Colonel (also a PhD) of more than 90 factual misstatements.

 >On the dust jacket there is mention that Col Corso was a member
 >of the NSC but in the book itself, he makes it clear that he was
 >on the NCS staff. "I was asking president Eisenhower for a
 >personal favor: to let me out of my fifth year on the NCS staff
 >so I could pick up a command of my own antiaircraft guided
 >missile battalion being formed up in Red Canyon New Mexico."(pg
 >36) Now how could you miss this Stan, if you read the book
 >carefully?

Another phony claim by Corso. According to a Sept. 7, 1956,
confidential letter from the Chief of the Intelligence Liaison
Staff "Lt. Colonel Corso is scheduled to leave the OCB staff
during the fall of 1956". ...." While on the OCB Staff, Corso
has been largely involved on the OCB Psychological Warfare
Program generally and specifically in the preparation of
unclassified propagandistic information briefs for the support
of the United States delegation at the United Nations"

 >There is no doubt about it; he was working for and with the NCS
 >but as a staff member. Let me say it again:staff, not member.

It is NSC, Ed. Corso was working for the OCB and not the NSC.

 >Other historians have recorded this fact. Col. Corso was a heavy
 >duty player.

Really? and at the Lt. Colonel level, too

 >He was involved with the overthrow of Jacob Arbenz in Guatemala
 >in the early 50's.

Writing unclassified propagandistic information briefs, no
doubt. Sounds pretty light weight to me.

 >Again, he was a staff member, not a member of NCS. I think it's
 >understandable how this could become twisted to "member" of the
 >NCS. The book says staff of the NCS and on the Art Bell show
 >Corso says Army staff of the NCS and Col. Alexander agrees and
 >states that Col. Corso is certainly who he says he is.
 >(Alexander addresses Corso as Col. throughout the interview.)

Corso was what is usually described as a telephone colonel. He
could answer the phone with the generic term Colonel. Nobody is
claiming that he could _not_ identify himself legitimately as
Lt. Colonel Philip J. Corso. The picture is certainly of him.
That says nothing about the legitimacy of his claims.

Peter Gersten was filing an FOIA suit to try to get more info to
verify Corso's claims. He published the sworn statement that
Corso claimed he was MEMBER of the NSC, a far more prestigious
post than a staff liaison for OCB. I contacted the Eisenhower
Library again. Their June 5, 1998, response to me..." Corso was
not a member of the National Security Council or its Ancillary
agency, the Operations Coordinating Board... he served on the
staff of the Psychological Strategy Board and its successor the
OCB from August 1953 to September 1956. He served on a number of
OCB Working Groups, including the POW Working Group. We have
not located any evidence that he ever attended an actual NSC
meeting...."

I faxed the letter to Peter. He contacted Corso suggesting he
might want to remove the sworn claim about being an NSC member.
Corso refused.

 >Col. Corso was a very powerful man and had many powerful
 >friends. Among them were Robert Cutler and C.D. Jackson the
 >author of the "Atoms for Peace' speech. Col. Corso was also a
 >member of the Willoughby network. I don't know how to explain
 >this to you any stronger than I have, but you won't get much
 >information from the Eisenhower library. Corso was a spook.
 >Don't you understand? A spook; he ran with a serious and tough
 >crowd. These were mean streets. A mistake could mean death.

Yes, I understand. He in his later life was suffering from
Delusions of Grandeur. The Ike Library has loads of formerly and
still classified documents especially about the NSC. Look at his
FBI file. Was he treated as though he were a big time operator,
or a pain in the neck small timer?

 >I posted an article on Col. Corso's FBI files and so far there
 >hasn't been a single criticism of my research on that article.
 >Only Greg, in the guise of responding, brought up an entirely
 >different subject: the Cuban missile crisis. And he wrote, in
 >effect, that Corso's information was nothing but BS in large
 >quantities. Now remember, I didn't bring up the subject but I
 >hope I've made folks on the list realize that Col. Corso was
 >telling the truth, from his point of view about the Cuban
 >crisis. The Birnes interview confirms that Paul Scott did break
 >the story and Corso was his source.

 >Stan, as I've written you many times; you're using the exact
 >same techniques to condemn Col. Corso and the AA as >pelicanists use
 >against you and other Ufologists.

This is plain BS. I gathered data rather than being selective
about it and ignoring that which doesn't fit.You decided to
believe Santilli and Corso. I checked. Both often didn't tell
the truth.

 >You won't look at the evidence and you refuse to draw a map,
 >metaphorical of course and worst of all, any excuse for
 >dismissing either subject will do: if one doesn't work, try
 >another.

 >Why would Col. Corso tell a lie of this magnitude? What evidence
 >do you have that he wasn't a very powerful person and didn't
 >have the type of access he claims he had?

How should I know why Corso would lie? I am a physicist not a
psychiatrist. I have no idea why an evil soul kidnapped and
murdered a 5 year old girl in Alberta early in May. It sure
happened.

Maybe Corso wanted to convince his family and the world that he
was a major hero single handedly saving the world. Maybe we was
just beginning senility. Maybe he wanted to get the last laugh
compared to those like JE Hoover who scorned him....Who cares?

The question is what evidence do you have, besides Corso's
claims and his s on's blind acceptance of them, that he was a
very powerful person? If he was so powerful , why didn't he make
Full Colonel

 >How did Ray Santilli fake the AA?

I didn't say he did. The question is is it genuine, not why or
how it was done.

 >Why do you refuse to look at the AA CDs or any of the new
 >evidence that Neil has presented and continues to accumulate.
 >Your main reason still seems to be that Ray lied to you, five
 >times I think it was.


It was many more than 5 times. Perhaps you need to read the
chapter of my book pp195-208 of TOP SECRET/MAJIC

 >But you offered Ray $100,000 for the footage. In essence your
 >position is that since Ray lied to you when you offered him the
 >100 grand, the AA is a fraud.

Utter nonsense. Ed. See page 200 of my book, which you
apparently haven't read very carefully, if at all. The offer, on
behalf of the For the People Network, who had the money, was
entirely "contingent on my acceptance of the footage as genuine
and access to the cameraman". Of course he refused... the film
isn't genuine and he knew there was no legitimate cameraman.
Jack Barnett was the first to film Elvis, was quite legtimate,
but was _not_ in the military and died before 1970. Ray didn't
buy the film from him until the early 1990s.

On page 207 and 208 I commented about the film "Although it has
been exploited by Ray Santili, I don't think he was responsible
for creating it"

 >Other than that you have no evidence. But the AA is not a fraud.
 >And Col. Corso is not a liar.

Read the Book Ed. Ray's multitude of claims don't stand up. The
film is a fraud. Wouild you prefer that I say that Corso, as an
old man, was guilty, perhaps unintentionally of substantial
misrepresentation? Sounds better. "He lied" is simpler.

 >http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m16-020.shtml

 >There is some confusion over Col. Corso's version of his rank
 >and various commands and we should try to figure out what the
 >problems are, not use this as a reason to reject Col. Corso's
 >testimony.

 >As for whether he was in command of the FT desk, here is the way
 >he describes his assignment: " I was to be his (Gen. Trudeau's)
 >special assistant in R&D." (pg38)

 >>Do you really believe all the stuff like seeing a body (no ice
 >>mentioned) at Ft. Riley, Kansas, unaccompanied by security
 >>people?

 >So you're implying that this is BS but you have no evidence.
 >Greg said the there was no way that Corso was involved in the
 >Cuban missile crisis either, but now we know he was. Although
 >Col. Corso's accounts seem outlandish on the surface, we should
 >at least consider the possibility that what he's telling us
 >might be true and probably is. Col. Corso was an intelligence
 >officer and by all accounts a damn good one, too. You won't
 >find his name in any official lists of important people; only in
 >a few forgotten footnotes. But he's there none the less, and
 >turns out to be quite an intriguing fellow

I kind of liked Corso when I met him and certainly considered the
possibility he was telling the whole truth. He wasn't. Too bad.

 >Also what was that about a Nobel just awarded for research in 58
 >that Col. Corso supposedly transferred in 62. Could you be more
 >specific?


If I get the time, I will look for that issue of Physics Today
and cite Chapter and verse... though they don't seem to matter
to you.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:26:49 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:29:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Hale


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 00:33:37 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:02:33 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

 >The 1973 Gallup Poll:  11 % of Adult Americans questioned said
 >that they had seen a UFO, themselves.


Bob,

Now let me see, 1973 ay, that's what 28 years ago, are you still
basing your eyes wide shut policy on out of date data?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:29:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:31:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 20:42:49 -0000

<snip>

 >Dennis,

 >You certainly suggest over and over that "visitors" are unlikely
 >because..., and human witnesses are fallible, so why bother.
 >This obviously is my shorthand expression for your skepticism. I
 >don't see you out there leading the charge for a more thorough
 >scientific investigation.


Dick,

Yes, I think visitors are unlikely...in large numbers.

Yes, I think human witnesses can be mistaken... that's not the
same as saying they're always mistaken.

As for your last sentence, I've done what I can, sometimes
publicly, sometimes behind the scenes. As editor of the MUFON
Journal for 12 years, I tried to publish the best material
available, regardless of which side of the fence it fell on. The
there's the book I co-edited, 1947-1997: Fifty Years of Flying
Saucers, and the one I co-authored, The Field Guide to UFOs.

Behind the scenes, I've lobbied that the MUFON database be made
available (free or at cost) as a research tool, either on the
web or on CD - or both. I think MUFON is finally getting around
to that.

I also pushed the MUFON Abduction Transcription Project - which
I still think is valuable, and should be continued, per the
trenchant criticisms made by David Hufford in his essay
published in the MIT proceedings. To which, I believe, both Budd
and David refused to contribute, for whatever reasons. I also
support a scientific analysis of the alien script samples
Hopkins and others may have collected. How is that one
languishing, btw?

My support in all those areas (and others) is that good science
begins at home.

<snip>

 >>Assume all your UFO wishes come true. Then what? Will
 >>tomorrow be any different from today?

 >>Dennis

 >Once again, I have no idea what you are talking about here, or
 >what sort of question this is (or purports to be). What are my
 >"UFO wishes" and what do they have to do with anything? I wish
 >the damn things had never shown up and dominated my life, mostly
 >for ill. Does that answer your question? If not, please rephrase
 >it and I'll try again.


I didn't mean to be so obtuse, and probably should have said
something like "ufology's wishes."

The point I was trying to make was that, most likely, nothing
fundamental would change in the wake of a Congressional
investigation, assuming one could ever be initiated. In fact, we
pretty much saw that with Roswell in the wake of both the Air
Force and GAO investigations. Neither lived up to "ufology's
wishes (or expectations)," so the field basically cried foul,
incomplete, sham, etc., and went about its business. Off the top
of my pointy head, I can't think of a single prominent ufologist
that came out and said, "hmm, you don't suppose these guys could
be on to something, do you?"

(Actually, I did, but that's one reason why I'm not a prominent
ufologist anymore. <BG!>)

So what would change with another "official" investigation,
assuming the official outcome would essentially remain
unchanged?

Ufology will never be satisfied with conclusions that don't
match its own.

Take an investigation into government secrecy. What answer would
ufology accept, other than an admission that, yes, Virginia,
there is a real MJ-12, or its real-world equivalent, and, yes,
it still exists, and, yes, it's still covering up the truth
about flying saucers. Denial of same would simply be interpreted
as backhanded "proof," or confirmation, of the cover up.

And if aliens really were physically abducting us in large
numbers, do you think that MJ-12 or an equivalent entity would
allow itself to be hauled before Congress and ever admit same?

At the end of the day, would another COMETA report or Sturrock
Panel fundamentally alter the chess pieces on the board and
their relative positions?

See, I told you I was cynical!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                    Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Aubeck

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:33:20 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Aubeck


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:00:30 -0500
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa


 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: The Legend of the Dropa

 >>Hello List Members,

 >>Having spent the weekend exploring the net and my archives
 >>raiding other people's � thanks, everyone, for your letters!),
 >>have reached a point in my research that I doubt I can go
 >>without some kind of major breakthrough.

<snip>

 >Erich Von Daniken (be not quick with a reflexive sneer...)
 >wrote in "Gods From Outer Space (1970 pp96-98)" the
 >following regarding the Dropa...

<snip>


Hi Alfred,

Thanks for your feedback.

Now, I don't want to burst your bubble but I found a curious
datum in my archives, and then again during my web search. You
can take a look at where it appears on the Net if you want at:

http://www.violations.dabsol.co.uk/weird/weirdpart3.htm

but here it is anyway:

"This story appears intriguing, however what appears historic
fact becomes decidedly fanciful when the author of the book
where this account first surfaced is mentioned. Erich Von
Daniken.

"Yes, the discs are there but little else is based on fact.
Daniken quotes his source for this story as a conversation in
Moscow in 1968 with Soviet writer Aleksandr Kazantsev and
records that the discs themselves and the documentation of their
discovery is preserved at the then Peking Academy of Prehistory
and the Chinese Academy of Sciences at T�ai-Pei in Taiwan.

"However over a period of four years, a journalist and expert in
linguistics and anthropology, Gordon Creighton, studied the
claims made, and on making further enquiries, drew numerous
blanks. Firstly he approached the scientific academies in both
T�ai-Pei and Peking for information, however received no
response to his enquiries. He then approached a number of
Chinese academics for information, but none of them had even
heard of the story. Then he contacted the Soviet writer who had
given the story to Von Daniken to check whether he had given Von
Daniken an accurate account. However the response was not as
expected; far from giving Von Daniken the story, Aleksandr
Kazantsev stated that Von Daniken had given it to him."

There's even a snappy photo of Erich von Darnitman himself which
you can copy, print and paste to your fridge door.

If anyone wants a list of my sources, by the way, I can send
them along in an e-mail.

Chris Aubeck









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:36:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >As for Rogue River, I consider that a very interesting sighting
 >indeed. I list it as NE/Gold Beach since the river is fairly
 >long .. and have it at 124:23W - 42:27N which should be close.

 >A sophisticated hoax? That's a little hard to feature. One
 >scientist might pull off a carefully engineered hoax just to
 >embarrass another one, but _five_ scientists on a fishing trip?

Two scientists/engineers, a dentist and two ladies


 >>I tried to pull in the relevant page of yours again, but
 >again I got a 404 error:

 >404 Error - File Not Found
 >The page or file you are looking for
 > http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.
 >Possible Reasons:
 >You may have spelled the URL incorrectly.
 >This site may have been removed due to a violation
 >of yadda yadda or moved to a different server.

 >I tried http://brumac.8k.com, and that came in fine again.
 >"Rogue" was easily located, but when I clicked on that, I got
 >the very same 404-error. I also experimented with
 >/ogueriver.html and variants.

Using Netscape I typed in:

http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/RogueRiver.html

and got there in a second (or so!).

 >Anyhow, my source is NICAP UFO Investigator, Vol.1 #3, which
 >must be only the third issue of that venerable work. I estimated
 >coordinates from that description and an old map. My take on the
 >object is of a 35-ft metallic disk/saucer craft with a fin on
t>he rear, traveling NNE at the speed of a jet plane.

 >My other (listed) source is Loren Gross, UFOs a History -1949
 >(first of three 1949 books, pg 76. )

 >About the only weakness I see is the implied brevity of the
 >sighting. At jet speed, the scientists may not have gotten a
 >very good look at it, although they did note the
 >uncharacteristic fin at the rear!

If you get to the web site information you will find that the object
approached, hovered, rotated on vertical axis and then departed,
reachin the apparent speed of a jet very quickly.  However, the
sighting lasted an estmated 2.5 minutes.  So plenty of time to
look...with binoculars.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:01:46 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:37:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:45:06 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:37:57 -0700

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 16:59:16 EDT
 >>>Fwd Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:25:46 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

 >>>Nope, twice is not all. I selected those two items because they
 >>>couldn't be blamed on Birnes or anyone else. We have the tape
 >>>with them coming out of his mouth. And, if you think lying about
 >>>his rank is unimportant, then you are mistaken. That is a court
 >>>martial offense. Besides, the point isn't about the relative
 >>>importance of the lies, but the fact that he did lie.

 >>My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
 >>important but that there seems to be some confusion about
 >>whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken.

 >Ed:

 >Have you ever been in the military? Could you offer a theory
 >about how one is confused or mistaken about one's rank, or
 >whether he had excercized a specific command or not?

 >>I know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
 >>confusion over this? I don't know.

 >The issue is not whether he felt entitled to it, but whether he
 >had ever been promoted to that rank. Corso claimed, in writing
 >when he signed his name in the type of signature block which is
 >used by more senior retired officers, that he was a retired full
 >Colonel. You are the one who seems confused; I don't know why,
 >but I can guess.

 >>All I know is that Col. Corso was the person he said he was
 >>and I have much independent proof for this. I first learned of
 >>Col. Corso eight years ago when I was conducting research
 >>on the Kennedy assassination.

 >>when I learned about Col. Corso's intention to write a book
 >>about his dumping alien debris on the business
 >>community, I was very interested.

 >>I had also learned of Col. Corso's involvement with the MIA
 >>problem both in Korea and Viet Nam as well. While his stories
 >>may seem fanciful, there is considerable evidence to back his
 >>claims.

 >>That's what you've done with both Col. Corso and Ray Santilli.
 >>You put them both in the same bag by saying they lied on
 >>one occasion so they must be lying on all occasions.

 >>and Col. Corso

 >>Everyone lies at one time or another. I don't think your
 >>examples qualify as lies. He says he was a commander and both
 >>Birnes and his son say this was true. If there are no official
 >>records for this then something else could be at play.

 >This demonstrates the lengths that you seem ready to go to
 >continue to prop up this man's fantastic BS about flying saucers
 >and his own imagined role in saving the World.

 >>Why not leave the subject open until we can prove it one way
 >>or another?

 >This statement cannot be taken seriously, except as an indication
 >of the fixation of your beliefs. If you want evidence of what is
 >wrong with UFOlogy, this is a fine example, no other supporting
 >documentation is needed.


Bob,

I guess the millennium has arrived; I totally agree with you
about Corso. Now, if you could only recognize how much you sound
like Corso's defenders in your comments about the Ravenna, Ohio,
case we might be making progress.


Dick








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther

From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:02:26 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:39:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther


 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>But of course the main point is not the rug or the feedback
 >>mechanism: the real point is the sighting itself and the
 >>supporting documentation... which, so far as I know, is the
 >>totality of information available on that sighting.

 >I tried to pull in the relevant page of yours again, but
 >again I got a 404 error:

Try http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue%20River.html


Additional (?) FOIA docs John Greenewald Jr's website
www.blackvault.com

http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb28.htm
-
http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb34.htm


Daniel G.

--
Just the Cases - UFO sightings database
http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/ufodb.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:25:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:41:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:28:08 -0500 (CDT)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >>>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began

 >>>... large glowing structured (disc-like) object ...
 >>>... making a humming sound.

 >>>... continuing to lluminate the ground via an inverted cone of
 >>>... light (narrower at the bottom) from its underside.

 >>>... As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >>>... jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >>>"... straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >>>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >>This jury member suggests Bob is guilty of deliberately ignoring
 >>wholesale evidence to the contrary. He should be sentenced to
 >>writing on the blackboard 500 times:

 >>* Venus is not disk-shaped

 >Please look at a bright, distant light and tell me exactly what
 >shape it assumes. If you say, "round", you are not looking
 >closely.

I don't think for a second, judging from these and other
remarks, that Bob seriously believes that the Ravenna sighting
was merely about extraordinarily hysterical police officers and
Venus. I think I detect a tongue buried deeply in cheek.

Listfolk may be interested in hearing who the Einstein was who
thought up the Venus explanation. It was an associate of Allen
Hynek, a systems engineer named William T. Powers, who worked at
Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory. Powers suggested
it in a phone conversation with Blue Book's Maj. Quintanilla.
Later, after Powers had seen the evidence in its totality, he
retracted the explanation and apologized for his role in
suggesting it to the Air Force.

"Apparently I found out considerably more about this event than
the Air Force investigator did," Powers wrote Spaur in May 1966,
"because I cannot agree with the evaluation publicly released a
few days after the sighting [that Spaur et al. had initially
seen a satellite, then Venus]... I now understand that you and
other witnesses did notice Venus and the Moon, and saw the
object in motion relative to them, as well as being able to see
a shape. At no time, however, did I suppose that the earlier
part of the sighting [explained as an Echo satellite] involved
anything other than an [unidentified] airborne object."

Amusingly, when Quintanilla explained his theory about the case
to Spaur's boss, Portage County Sheriff Ross Dustman, Dustman
(in his words) "laughed out loud." Seems the only reasonable
response.

It's also amusing that theory rejected even by the man who first
proposed it is still being discussed as if it merited something
other than what the good sheriff gave 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:25:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:42:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 13:28:08 -0500 (CDT)
 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Ravenna 1966
 >>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:27:48 -0000

 >>>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began

 >>>... large glowing structured (disc-like) object ...
 >>>... making a humming sound.

 >>>... continuing to lluminate the ground via an inverted cone of
 >>>... light (narrower at the bottom) from its underside.

 >>>... As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >>>... jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >>>"... straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >>>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >>This jury member suggests Bob is guilty of deliberately ignoring
 >>wholesale evidence to the contrary. He should be sentenced to
 >>writing on the blackboard 500 times:

 >>* Venus is not disk-shaped

 >Please look at a bright, distant light and tell me exactly what
 >shape it assumes. If you say, "round", you are not looking
 >closely.

I don't think for a second, judging from these and other
remarks, that Bob seriously believes that the Ravenna sighting
was merely about extraordinarily hysterical police officers and
Venus. I think I detect a tongue buried deeply in cheek.

Listfolk may be interested in hearing who the Einstein was who
thought up the Venus explanation. It was an associate of Allen
Hynek, a systems engineer named William T. Powers, who worked at
Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory. Powers suggested
it in a phone conversation with Blue Book's Maj. Quintanilla.
Later, after Powers had seen the evidence in its totality, he
retracted the explanation and apologized for his role in
suggesting it to the Air Force.

"Apparently I found out considerably more about this event than
the Air Force investigator did," Powers wrote Spaur in May 1966,
"because I cannot agree with the evaluation publicly released a
few days after the sighting [that Spaur et al. had initially
seen a satellite, then Venus]... I now understand that you and
other witnesses did notice Venus and the Moon, and saw the
object in motion relative to them, as well as being able to see
a shape. At no time, however, did I suppose that the earlier
part of the sighting [explained as an Echo satellite] involved
anything other than an [unidentified] airborne object."

Amusingly, when Quintanilla explained his theory about the case
to Spaur's boss, Portage County Sheriff Ross Dustman, Dustman
(in his words) "laughed out loud." Seems the only reasonable
response.

It's also amusing that theory rejected even by the man who first
proposed it is still being discussed as if it merited something
other than what the good sheriff gave 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:43:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:45:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>By the way, why have you never announced to the community that
 >>the so called nurse's story is not true and that Glen Dennis is
 >>being deceptive. It was through Dennis that we learned that the
 >>Roswell aliens had only four digits on each hand. Since this is
 >>the only verification for this information, isn't the actual
 >>number of digits still up for discussion. I've know that Dennis
 >>was being deceptive for several months. He failed a VSA along
 >>with McGovern.

 >Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
 >occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
 >point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
 >The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
 >quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
 >by him, me maybe more so than others.


I want to add my own voice here, to say that Kevin most
certainly has done what he says. I was astonished when I read Ed
Gehrman's statement.

In this sorry field of ufology, where everyone, believers and
skeptics, acts as if they're always right, Kevin is one of the
few people who'll admit when he's wrong.


Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                           The Watchdog - 05-21-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:07:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:47:09 -0400
Subject: The Watchdog - 05-21-01


UFOWATCHDOG.COM
http://www.ufowatchdog.com
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"

***NEWS*** http://www.ufowatchdog.com/news.html
~ Unknown Force Pulls Distant Probes
~ The Scotland FT
~ IFO Database Online
~ Debunking Common Skeptical Arguments
~ Reed Hoax Goes South of the Border
~ MIR Balloon Project Ends - No More UFO Misidentifications?
~ The UFO Flap of July 7, 1947

~Ad *First Annual Northwest UFO/Paranormal Conference* Ad~
http://www.seattleartbellchatclub.com/NWUFO.html
UFOWATCHDOG.COM will be covering this conference...see you there!

***CAVEAT EMPTOR*** http://www.ufowatchdog.com/caveat.html
~ The Morton Files - Updates section added
~ Ed Dames: Hocus Pocus









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:48:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:13:52 -0400

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:53:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>The point being is that if you understand the classification
 >>>system, you could see the _possibility_ if Menzel did in fact
 >>>have a MJ-12 clearance (if such a thing existed) and be denied
 >>>access to AF UFO files.

 >>If true, this would be very good evidence that MJ-12 is not what
 >>you believe it to be.

 >>If the puppet master can't control the puppet, what is he the
 >>master of?

 >Menzel gained access to Project Blue Book files from another
 >scientist at Harvard, and used the files to write his first
 >book. He was not authorized to have these files. Ruppelt
 >wanted Menzel disciplined, however, the ATIC Commander, Colonel
 >Dunn nixed the idea. Ruppelt also complained that Menzel
 >returned the material out of order and scrambled.

 >[It would seem to me if Menzel were the big MJ-12 guru, that he
 >could get the cases through other channels and this subterfuge
 >would not have been necessary. In January 1952, the Air Force
 >routinely starting send copies of UFO reports to a number of
 >other government agencies. Opps, MJ-12 isn't listed on the DF.
 >Maybe they didn't have "a need to know."]

 >Robert:

 >Would you agree that this all suggests that Menzel was not a
 >member of MJ-12?



Hi Bob,

I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me that MJ12
exists/existed.  Beside, the Ike Briefing document says that MJ12 was in
liaison with the BB head.  Should have been no problem for Menzel to get the
material he need, if he was in such an outfit.

Jan Aldrich









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                   Nick Balaskas on City-TV - Another View

From: Michael J. Woods <mike.woods@sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 20:36:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:54:18 -0400
Subject: Nick Balaskas on City-TV - Another View


Dear Nick, Kelly, Larry and even you, Stanton,

First, congratulations to Nick on a very worthy appearance on
'Breakfast Television', City-TV, Toronto, which is a difficult
proposition at the best of times, B-T being a three-ring circus
without an adult Ringmaster. Nick came after VERY intelligently
against Anne Rohmer... who admittedly isn't the brightest light
in broadcasting.

How do I know? Confession time.

Besides being a long time lurker and very rare contributor to
the List, besides the time I've spent with Papa Errol,
frightening people at the 50th anniversary at Roswell, or boring
the radio audience on his program, which I almost co-hosted for
a while...

I'm also the senior news writer for Breakfast Television, I've
been writing news for the show for almost 10 years now... and
I'm the "on-air" (not really) personality they cut away to after
interviewing Nick. I'm the one who said "I believe the Aliens
will land one day"... because Stanton is right, if we want to
get the message out, we can't be apologist Ufologists.

So Stanton's right, the media is more often willing to listen
than not, Kelly's right, it is refreshing to see a straight
interview with a ufologist, and Larry's right, it only took 50
years to get that way. And frankly, if I wasn't a veteran B-T
writer and pushy UFO believer with a background in military
boxing, I'm not sure Nick would have received the softball
interview he did.

And it's still nice to see a friendly interview, even if it is
with pet media.


Mike (UFO GUY) Woods


The truth can STAY out there,
Send in a good FANTASY!!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                  Re: orso's FBI Files Revisited - Gerhman

From: Ed Gehrman<egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:24:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:00:05 -0400
Subject: Re: orso's FBI Files Revisited - Gerhman


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

 >Just what difference does it make what Phil Corso Jr. believes?

I was only answering Bob's assertion that Phil Jr. only believed
10% of what his father had written. I contacted him and he
stated that this was a misunderstanding and he backs his father
100%. I'm just reporting what he said. Other than that, his only
contribution is to verify that his father was a major player,
and he believes that his father seeded alien technology into the
US business community.

 >Since there is no classified information in the book, and no
 >backup for the claims, how could the government forbid
 >publication?

Maybe they checked on Col. Corso and found out that he was
ligitimate They may even have thought about trying to stop
publication. But then they probably asked a PR firm to assess
the book's viability and the PR folks told them not to worry.
They'll all think it's BS anway. Let it die a quiet death.

 >As I understand, it the corrections weren't noted
 >until after the book was published. I have one list by a full
 >Colonel (also a PhD) of more than 90 factual misstatements.

Why don't you post this? It sounds interesting. Or, send it to
me privately. I'd be interested in looking at it.

 >Really? and at the Lt. Colonel level, too

Yes, really.

 >>He was involved with the overthrow of Jacob Arbenz in Guatemala
 >>in the early 50's.

 >Writing unclassified propagandistic information briefs, no
 >doubt. Sounds pretty light weight to me.

How much do you want to hear? Are you asking me to prove that
Col. Corso might qualify as a heavyweight?

 >The picture is certainly of him.
 >That says nothing about the legitimacy of his claims.

But if we can prove that some of the claims are true, then will
you take another look?

 >Yes, I understand. He in his later life was suffering from
 >Delusions of Grandeur. The Ike Library has loads of formerly and
 >still classified documents especially about the NSC. Look at his
 >FBI file. Was he treated as though he were a big time operator,
 >or a pain in the neck small timer?

I think I prove otherwise.

 >I gathered data rather than being selective
 >about it and ignoring that which doesn't fit.You decided to
 >believe Santilli and Corso. I checked. Both often didn't tell
 >the truth.

It has nothing to do with belief. Ray is telling the truth about
how he obtained the tapes so whether he lied to you 50 thousand
time makes no difference.

The AA is the dissection of something that isn't easily
explainable. I want to discuss that fact. I can't understand why
you continue to ignore Neil's evidence and refuse to view the AA
CD's. They're yours , free of charge but you have to open your
eyes. I posted a perfectly written paper on the Discussion of
the Debris by M. Dennis and you failed to respond about this
evidence. Evidence, get that... new evidence that links the AA
to the Forth Worth debris. Not only that but we now know for
sure that the footage Ray purchased was actual film. It was
transferred to video. There were no inhancements.

 >Maybe Corso wanted to convince his family and the world that he
 >was a major hero single handedly saving the world. Maybe we was
 >just beginning senility. Maybe he wanted to get the last laugh
 >compared to those like JE Hoover who scorned him....Who cares?

I do.

 >The question is what evidence do you have, besides Corso's
 >claims and his s on's blind acceptance of them, that he was a
 >very powerful person? If he was so powerful , why didn't he make
 >Full Colonel.

He wasn't powerful in that way. He was a spook, well conected.

 >I didn't say he did. The question is is it genuine, not why or
 >how it was done.

Yes! We agree on this.

So why don't you look at the evidence we've accumulated?

 >Of course he refused... the film
 >isn't genuine and he knew there was no legitimate cameraman.
 >Jack Barnett was the first to film Elvis, was quite legtimate,
 >but was _not_ in the military and died before 1970. Ray didn't
 >buy the film from him until the early 1990s.

No Stan. You're wrong. Ray purchased the film from the
cameraman. It was real film. Who the cameraman was is of no
importance. The only thing that's important is looking at the
footage and seeing if we can solve the mystery of what actually
happened in New Mexico in 47. As for Col. Corso I stand on
Mike's VSA.


http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m16-020.shtml















   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 22

                         Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:07:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:12:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


<snip>

 >>>Bob Young has proposed that the Ravenna, Ohio, and points East
 >>>UFO of April 17, 1966, was the planet Venus. The sighting began

 >>>... large glowing structured (disc-like) object ...
 >>>... making a humming sound.

lookng in which direction? North, South East, West, etc.
and what elevation?


 >>>>... continuing to lluminate the ground via an inverted cone of
 >>>>... light (narrower at the bottom) from its underside.

 >>>>... As the three groups of police watched, they saw the Air Force
 >>>... jets approaching. Just then the bright point of light zoomed
 >>>"... straight up" abruptly and disappeared.

 >>>Bob says Venus. Jury?

 >>>This jury member suggests Bob is guilty of deliberately ignoring
 >>>wholesale evidence to the contrary. He should be sentenced to
 >>>writing on the blackboard 500 times:

 >>>* Venus is not disk-shaped

 >Please look at a bright, distant light and tell me exactly what
 >shape it assumes. If you say, "round", you are not looking
 >closely.

Few people can see the "disc" of Venus, which, by the way, is never a
perfect disc, always a crescent

 >>* Venus does not hum

 >What evidence is there that the humming reported by witnesses
 >was caused by the distant UFO?

My, my yes,. What evidence? Did the witnesses report that or
was it made up by the investigators?

Was there a humming before the witnesses saw the UFO?

When did the humming end? Was one of the witnesses singing to
himself?

Questions, questions!

 >>* Venus does not emit inverted light cones

 >See the comment, above, re the shape of Venus.

Has nothing to do with the shape of Venus... which can hardly be
seen by the naked eye anyway. Also, did the light one cause
noticeable ground illumination?


 >>* Venus does not zoom straight up and disappear
 >>when Air Force jets approach

 >Except when Venus disappears with growing daylight at
 >about the time planes arrive. This claim is virtually identical
 >to one I once recieved about Jupiter.

<LOL> Talk about a sssslllllooooowwwww zoom.


Is there a possibility that the witnesses were seeing Venus
at the end of the sighting? Yes.

But what about the beginning of the sighting.....









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                        Re: Serious Research - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:47:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hi Dick, Bob, All,

'Opinion' ahead! Run for the hills!!!  ;) Not all of this is
being directed at you personally Bob. It's more of a general
comment than 'Bob Young' specific. Although it does apply to you
in many respects.

<snip>

Dick Hall wrote:

 >>Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >>where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >>CUFOS-NICAP files.

Bob responded:

 >Got any saucers there?

UFOs represent a profound event in the history of mankind. There
is enough 'hard' evidence for the existence of a 'real'
phenomenon (whatever its origin) to convince even the hardest
skeptic that there is a genuine mystery here. There are enough
FOIA released -government documents- alone (aside from the
aforementioned Bluebook and CUFOs files, etc.) to put to rest
any doubts as to the existence of 'anomalous' craft(s) (genuine
unknowns) operating in our collective air space.

Only someone who has _unchangeably_ made up their mind about the
nature of UFOs could question its validity as a real phenom and
continually demand "proof."

The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one thing,
but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive
(like having 500 lbs of lead in your pants while trying to climb
Mt. Everest) to continue to indulge the ones who refuse to
accept all the available evidence.

If the available data is not enough to convince you that there
is a real phenomenon involving craft of unknown origin and
manufacture, then fine, just step aside while the rest try to
move the discussion and the investigation of the subject another
square or two on the board. At this stage in the proceedings,
continually taking the time to debate (indulge) the "show me a
cigarette lighter from a UFO" crowd is slowing any progress or
inroads that can be made toward expanding our understanding of
the phenomenon.

I don't know about anybody else on the List but I came here to
get information about UFOs and to participate in any discussions
about their purpose or origin. Not to try to 'convince' anybody
about the reality of it. We _waste_ almost half of the
discussion time (bandwidth) of this List watching a seemingly
endless debate where 'one side' is perpetually trying to
convince the 'other side' that the phenomenon is real. It just
seems to me that our collective time would be better spent
trying to understand the events taking place rather than
debating/educating those who remain on square one and still
question its reality. When they 'catch up' and arrive at the
point where they realize that we are dealing with a genuine
mystery, they may then be able to contribute something of value
to the ongoing discussion on this _UFO_ List.

IMHO if you honestly believe that there is 'nothing' to all of
this even after having studied all the available evidence, then
maybe taking up valuable bandwidth on a "UFO List" isn't the
most productive way to spend your time and energy. Frankly I
don't care if Bob or anybody else "believes" or not. I'm here
to learn what I can about the UFO phenomenon, not to "educate"
or "convince" those who have made prejudgments about it.

Need to actually see a UFO before you believe? That's cool. Wait
till you see one, or until they land in your backyard. Then you
can join us and help us to figure out just what the hell is
going on. Asking us to explain or justify our position or
beliefs day after day, week after week, is a stone cold drag.

Dick Hall (or Jerry Clark, or Stan Freidman etc. etc.) does not
have to incessantly justify or explain their position or beliefs
to all comers on the List. That's why they write books. It is a
testament to how patient, genuinely nice, and accommodating
these folks are when they take the time to answer (usually for
the umpteenth time) the same old questions regarding the
evidence for UFOs. The "proof" is there for all to see and study
for themselves. I'd rather use this time to pick Dick Hall's
brain and learn from his long experience than to watch him have
to explain/justify his position three times a week to every
"show me" guy that rolls down the pike.

If you just "don't get it" then you just "don't get it." Fine,
please step off and let us all move ahead to a more productive
and intelligent discussion of the subject. Because you have
already made up your mind that the phenom doesn't exist doesn't
mean that we _all_ have to remain eternally stuck there. Can we
puleeeze move past the "show me" stage? I'm starting to feel
like I'm stuck at a dance party where the *record needle is
stuck in the same groove.

(*showing my age! <LOL>)


Regards to all,

John Velez, 'UFO Knower' who needs to know more! Not here to
educate or convince anybody of anything. Ees not my yob meng!
:)

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                        Re: Ravenna 1966 - van Gemert

From: Jean van Gemert <j.vangemert@chello.nl>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:25:26 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:06:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 -  van Gemert


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:14:28 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

 >Please look at a bright, distant light and tell me exactly what
 >shape it assumes. If you say, "round", you are not looking
 >closely.

Venus is a pinpoint source of light, Bob, which means, in case
you don't know yet, that the only characteristics one can really
determine is that it is a) small, and b) sharp. Venus only looks
round when viewed through binoculars or a telescope.

 >What evidence is there that the humming reported by witnesses
 >was caused by the distant UFO?

And what evidence is there that you have read the case reports?
Here are a couple of easy-to-follow clues. Witnesses see no UFO,
they report no humming. Witnesses see a UFO, they report
humming. UFO leaves, humming sound also disappears.

Gee, do you think there might be a cause and effect relationship
there?

 >>* Venus does not emit inverted light cones

 >See the comment, above, re the shape of Venus.

I am intrigued how you isolate particular snippets of testimony
and focus on those specifically to explain them in prosaic
terms, while ignoring the much broader context of the witnesses'
statements which are not so easy to pigeon-hole. Seriously, as a
law student I can't bring myself to do that. It would be immoral
and dishonest.

Please explain how an object reported to be 50-feet across,
which emitted a cone of light which lit up the surrounding area
as if it were "as bright as day", can be Venus.

Do tell, Bob. And no waffling this time. Also, put the scissors
and the shredder away, no cutting into testimony.

 >>* Venus does not zoom straight up and disappear
 >>when Air Force jets approach

 >Except when Venus disappears with growing daylight at
 >about the time planes arrive. This claim is virtually identical
 >to one I once recieved about Jupiter.

Bob, you're being silly again. Not only is the disappearance of
Venus due to increasing daylight a GRADUAL progression, meaning
Venus remains at its location and GRADUALLY mixes in with the
background sky, but the police officers reported Venus shooting
upwards, making a "vertical climb straight up". I suppose the
Venusians flew Venus away, eh, Bob?










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:26:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Incidentally, I had direct communications from a scientist of
 >>the Kuwait scientific organization (ca't recall its name right
 >>now). Iraqui aircraft landing in a Kuwait oil field?

 >Hell, two years later they captured the lot in a few hours.

Bob,

The meaning and logic of this statement totally elude me. How
reasonable is it that an Iraqui aircraft landed in a Kuwaiti oil
field (just as the electricity "coincidentally" failed) and then
took off again without being recognized for what it was?

 >>>Nor do I have any reason to beleive that they have _actually_
 >>>studied _any_ UFO cases on their own. A very short "briefing",
 >>>disturbingly similar to the Robertson Panel in 1953, in which
 >>>"science" was subservient to public relations.

 >>Who's public relations effort do you think this was, and what
 >>might have been its purpose?

 >>If you have actually read the Robertson Panel report, you will
 >>be aware that they were concerned with the popular image of UFOs
 >>and trying to debunk it, rather than trying to do any real
 >>science, because they feared UFO reports would clog intelligence
 >>panels. That is a political-military PR type of activity, not
 >>science.

 >I wasn't referring to the Robertson Panel, but asked who's PR
 >effort you think the Sturrock Panel's was? Any ideas?

Your PR effort to make the Sturrock panel out to be something
far more (and more meaningful) than it was will suffice. I can
play semantical games too. After these poorly informed
scientists hastened through a superficial briefing, they
actually concluded that some unexplained things might be going
on that deserved scientific attention (but found no evidence of
ET; of course not, going from a state of no doubt complete
ignorance to exposure to some not-so-easily-explainable things
in a very short period of time).

But they quickly engaged their CYA defenses when they were
criticized by colleagues for acting like "UFO believers" and
began crawfishing. Altogether, a pseudoscientific sham much like
the Robertson Panel, and to some degree the Condon report. "PR"
is as good a shorthand expression for that sort of unscientific
behavior as any. The "PR" in this case is trying to appear
"scientific" and "open-minded" while not actually behaving that
way.

 >>>If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
 >>>meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
 >>>states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
 >>>virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
 >>>area.

 >>>As a matter of fact, only a tiny proportion of fireball
 >>>meteors are _reported_ at all. They can be visible over a wide
 >>>area, if the sky is clear or dark and they are sufficiently
 >>>bright and, but whether anyone happens to be looking at that
 >>>hour is another matter.

 >>Good God! It didn't look like a meteor, it didn't act like a
 >>meteor.

 >Who says? Sound like one to me, and I've seen a bundle of them,
 >including brilliant green bolides.

You've seen a fireball approach a helicopter, hover above it
long enough for ground witnesses to see it approach, stop their
car, and get out and watch as the two hovered near each other?
Wow! I envy you!

 >>it was not reported elsewhere as surely a fireball of
 >>this magnitude and duration would have been. Ground witnesses
 >>saw it hovering near the helicopter and beaming a green light
 >>down on the helicopter.

 >These ground "witnesses" surfaced three years later after
 >newspaper publicity describing the sighting. According to Phil
 >Klass, they placed the UFO miles away from the helo.

"According to Phil Klass?" You ignore Jennie Zeidman's
meticulous investigation and reconstruction of the case ("A
helicopter-UFO Encounter Over Ohio," Center for UFO Studies,
1979, 122 pgs.) and accept Klass's erroneous remarks based on
armchair debunking? Shame on you! What does it matter that the
witnesses were not found immediately? The UFO and helicopter
were placed in close proximity, not "miles away."

Unlike Klass, Jennie actually interviewed the witnesses for two
hours at the site. She reconstructs a timeline of what they saw,
first from their moving car and then after they stopped and got
out. They saw two sets of lighted objects converge. The second
steady-lighted object approached what was now recognizable as a
helicopter and stopped over it.

They watched the sight for about 30 seconds before even getting
out of the car (already straining a meteor hypothesis) and saw
that the UFO was an elongated craftlike (blimp-shaped) object
with a DARK body and lights on either end. A brilliant green
light then beamed DOWNWARD from one end of the UFO and
illuminated the helicopter and the treetops in their vicinity
lasting about 10 seconds (total elapsed time now about 40
seconds, and recall that they had watched it before that from
the moving car).

It was bigger in apparent size than the helicopter. The two
objects then moved in tandem in a zig-zag flight pattern before
diverging.

 >>It had visible structure and precisely positioned body lights.

 >So does a fragmenting fireball. All fragements are "precisely
 >positioned". Since the object was an unkown, what could this
 >claim possibly mean?

How can I say this, er, fragmenting fireballs also fragment;
they don't have dark elongated bodies with lights at either end,
and a downward oriented beam of green light.

 >>When it departed, it showed a white "taillight" and made a
 >>45 degree turn to the right.

 >As a bright meteor high in the atmosphere (not really near as
 >assumed) moves away and disappears, it can appear to change
 >direction. Last November during the Leonids I was lucky enough
 >to catch a so called "Earth grazer", just as the radiant was
 >rising in the east. The thing zoomed across the sky and looked
 >like the afterburner of a jet as it disappeared in the distance.

But it didn't stop and hover and illuminate the terrain beneath
it, presumably.

 >We're talking about descriptions of unexpected things seen in
 >seconds. The fireball looks a lot different at it's peak
 >intensity and when it is nearly burned out, it can look like it
 >is "zooming away."

Granted. But to apply that theory in this case is to ignore (or
totally reject) a lot of independent witness testimony (three
separate groups of witnesses). Which seems to be par for the
course among skeptibunkers. You don't so much offer an
explanation for what was actually observed as deny that they saw
what they said they saw.

And I repeat; show me any objective evidence that it was a
fireball. The ones that are not seen are clearly irrelvant. This
one (if that's what it was) clearly was seen and should have
been seen over a wide area. I am betting that you can't find an
American Meteor Society (or other meteor observer net) fireball
report for that date, time, location. I'll even accept a
newspaper report of a fireball at that time and place. That
would give me pause and cause me to reconsider your hypothesis.



Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                                Magazine Sale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:26:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:30:04 -0400
Subject: Magazine Sale


Dear Colleagues,

Further to my recent e-mail to you regarding the sale of Nick
Redfern's UFO books, I am please to tell you that the Magazine
sale has also been added to the page. You can find this at the
following link:

http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/nicksbooks.html

Do you have an event or UFO related issue you would like a vast
section of the Net to see? If so please forward any details to
me at my address royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk and I will help
you get it noticed.


Best Regards,

Roy Hale
Editor Down To Earth Magazine on the Net
http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk

* Supporting British Ufology *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

             Chile: Baquedano y Sierra Gorda Chupacabra Evidence

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:24:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:35:00 -0400
Subject: Chile: Baquedano y Sierra Gorda Chupacabra Evidence


SOURCE: La Estrella del Loa
DATE: Tuesday, May 22, 2001

Chupacabras leaves evidence at Baquedano and Sierra Gorda

Despite the apparent calm surrounding the so-called Chupacabras case,
Jaime Ferrer, director of the Calama UFO Center, assured that parties
associated to his organization continue reporting situations linked to
the alleged entity at Baquedano and Sierra Gorda.

At each of these towns, he notes, there are persons who claim having seen
and heard more than one of this type of beast, whch are even leaving
behind physical traces such as small dead animals.

"My sources tell me that vehicles tend to drive by very early to collect
the evidence, in order that this may not become widely known. There's a
group interested in concealing the truth, but one finds out all the same.
Some tell me they've heard something akin to the howls of this predator,
particularly at night," stated the researcher.

He urged the community to report this type of case in order to collect
the greatest amount of evidence regarding the alleged phenomenon, and
further invited people to participate in a large global watch to be held
on Saturday, June 23 and Sunday, June 24 to celebrate the International
UFO Research Day.

###################
Translation (C) 2001. Scott Corrales, IHU.
Special Thanks to Dr. Virgilio Sanchez Ocejo, Miami UFO Center










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                         Re: Talk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:52:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:38:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:29:28 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 20:42:49 -0000


Dennis,

 >The point I was trying to make was that, most likely, nothing
 >fundamental would change in the wake of a Congressional
 >investigation, assuming one could ever be initiated. In fact, we
 >pretty much saw that with Roswell in the wake of both the Air
 >Force and GAO investigations. Neither lived up to "ufology's
 >wishes (or expectations)," so the field basically cried foul,
 >incomplete, sham, etc., and went about its business. Off the top
 >of my pointy head, I can't think of a single prominent ufologist
 >that came out and said, "hmm, you don't suppose these guys could
 >be on to something, do you?"

With all due respect, my friend, you'd better refresh your
historical memory.

The Condon Committee was criticized from within and from
without ufology for its many obvious failings. Yes, it measured
up to debunkerdom's wishes for authoritarian dismisssal, but
nobody else's, it appears. The only people who seem to think
it did a good job are debunkers, who of course, as we all know,
never have a bad word to say about other debunkers - so what
else is new? And does anybody, beyond debunkers, actually
_defend_ Blue Book?

Likewise, the official conclusions about Roswell were questioned
not just by some ufologists (while, of course, others embraced
it with unbecoming enthusiasm) but by outsiders. I remember
watching the live June 24, 1997, press conference on CNN when
the Air Force announced its Latest Final Solution to the Roswell
Problem - namely that witnesses had miraculously mistaken (in
1947 nonexistent) crash-test dummies with humanoid bodies. A
number of reporters laughed out loud, and the theory was treated
with a fair amount of ridicule outside ufology before dropping
into the memory hole. Which, of course, the Air Force knew it
would, because society implicitly believes that since UFOs don't
exist, even stupid explanations, preferably not closely
examined, are better than none at all.

And _you_ talk about cynicism.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:15:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:40:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Clark


 >From: Ed Gehrman<egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:24:42 -0700


 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

 >>Just what difference does it make what Phil Corso Jr. believes?

 >I was only answering Bob's assertion that Phil Jr. only believed
 >10% of what his father had written. I contacted him and he
 >stated that this was a misunderstanding and he backs his father
 >100%. I'm just reporting what he said. Other than that, his only
 >contribution is to verify that his father was a major player,
 >and he believes that his father seeded alien technology into the
 >US business community.

 >>Since there is no classified information in the book, and no
 >>backup for the claims, how could the government forbid
 >>publication?

 >Maybe they checked on Col. Corso and found out that he was
 >legitimate They may even have thought about trying to stop
 >publication. But then they probably asked a PR firm to assess
 >the book's viability and the PR folks told them not to worry.
 >They'll all think it's BS anway. Let it die a quiet death.

Ed and Stan,

I may as well weigh in here with my own small experience.

In early April 1997 I had a business meeting at Pocket Books'
editorial office in New York City, where an associate and I
were pitching a project. Simon and Schuster, which owns
Pocket Books, has its headquarters on the same floor.

Early in the course of the discussion, a pleasant young man
entered the room and was introduced as an editor for S&S.
He said he was the editor for a forthcoming UFO book by
Philip Corso. By then, of course, I'd heard the rumors about
that book's contents, and I asked him, off the record, what
he thought of it. I don't recall his exact words, but I do
remember that he laughed and let me know that he didn't
believe a word of it.

I came away from that experience with renewed respect for
the cynicism of the publishing industry. That respect was
further deepened when I finally read the book.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:43:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

<snip>

 >How should I know why Corso would lie? I am a physicist not
 >a psychiatrist. I have no idea why an evil soul kidnapped
 >and murdered a 5 year old girl in Alberta early in May. It
 >sure happened.

 >Maybe Corso wanted to convince his family and the world that
 >he was a major hero single handedly saving the world. Maybe
 >we was just beginning senility. Maybe he wanted to get the
 >last laugh compared to those like JE Hoover who scorned him
 >....Who cares?

I think the motivation for the "factual misstatements" is an
important thing. I think we _should_ care, although you are
probably right and most _don't_ care. But the man had to have a
reason for lying.

I don't know what his reason was, but I believe there is a
reason that he did what he did. Corso was not stupid. He had to
know that there were going to be people checking every detail of
the information in his book. He had to know there would be
questions, and that any non-factual data he tried to pass off as
factual would be discovered, and it would reflect unfavorably on
him in the long run.

The man was a Lt. Colonel... does the attaining of that rank not
foster some degree of honor in a person? I've never been in the
military so I don't know. Perhaps some of the former military
list members can answer that one for me.

It just doesn't make any sense that the man would lie without a
very good reason. And, in my opinion, whatever motivated him to
lie is something that we _should_ care about.

My two cents

Bobbie


==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
--->backwoods of Mississippi
--->USA
--->planet Earth
--->somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:55:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:11:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:01:46 -0000

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:45:06 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I guess the millennium has arrived; I totally agree with you
 >about Corso. Now, if you could only recognize how much you sound
 >like Corso's defenders in your comments about the Ravenna, Ohio,
 >case we might be making progress.


Dick,

Ha. I can't stop now.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                    Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Anthony

From: Gary Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:28:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:55:22 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Anthony


 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Aubeck


 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:00:30 -0500
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa


 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >>>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: The Legend of the Dropa

 >>>Hello List Members,

 >>>Having spent the weekend exploring the net and my archives
 >>>raiding other people's � thanks, everyone, for your letters!),
 >>>have reached a point in my research that I doubt I can go
 >>>without some kind of major breakthrough.

<snip>

 >>Erich Von Daniken (be not quick with a reflexive sneer...)
 >>wrote in "Gods From Outer Space (1970 pp96-98)" the
 >>following regarding the Dropa...

<snip>


 >Hi Alfred,

 >Thanks for your feedback.

 >Now, I don't want to burst your bubble but I found a curious
 >datum in my archives, and then again during my web search. You
 >can take a look at where it appears on the Net if you want at:

http://www.violations.dabsol.co.uk/weird/weirdpart3.htm

 >but here it is anyway:

 >"This story appears intriguing, however what appears historic
 >fact becomes decidedly fanciful when the author of the book
 >where this account first surfaced is mentioned. Erich Von
 >Daniken.

 >"Yes, the discs are there but little else is based on fact.
 >Daniken quotes his source for this story as a conversation in
 >Moscow in 1968 with Soviet writer Aleksandr Kazantsev and
 >records that the discs themselves and the documentation of their
 >discovery is preserved at the then Peking Academy of Prehistory
 >and the Chinese Academy of Sciences at T'ai-Pei in Taiwan.

 >"However over a period of four years, a journalist and expert in
 >linguistics and anthropology, Gordon Creighton, studied the
 >claims made, and on making further enquiries, drew numerous
 >blanks. Firstly he approached the scientific academies in both
 >T'ai-Pei and Peking for information, however received no
 >response to his enquiries. He then approached a number of
 >Chinese academics for information, but none of them had even
 >heard of the story. Then he contacted the Soviet writer who had
 >given the story to Von Daniken to check whether he had given Von
 >Daniken an accurate account. However the response was not as
 >expected; far from giving Von Daniken the story, Aleksandr
 >Kazantsev stated that Von Daniken had given it to him."

 >There's even a snappy photo of Erich von Darnitman himself which
 >you can copy, print and paste to your fridge door.

 >If anyone wants a list of my sources, by the way, I can send
 >them along in an e-mail.

 >Chris Aubeck

Hi Alfred, Chris and List,

Alfred, Chris may be correct here. I have followed this case up
to some extent and expense, surprisingly the only thing of any
note from the Chinese end is Gordon Creighton's brilliant
investigation of this case during the 70's, which is still
logged to this day with certain Chinese establishments. In fact,
I might venture it was Creighton who initially tried to get at
the truth of the Dropa story and in so doing, may have been
first to alert the Chinese to the story's existence.

On 2 September 2000, I politely emailed Erich von Daniken to try
and obtain a clearer picture of his claims about the Dropa and
to see if photographs of the alleged stones and hieroglyphs (in
broad sense of term) were or could be obtained? Alas, Mr. von
Daniken was not forthcoming with a reply, so perhaps we should
exercise a bit more diligence in respect of this story. Or else,
permit those with better facts to stand forth..!

Best Regards

Gary Anthony










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:18:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:21:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:26:49 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 00:33:37 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:02:33 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

 >>The 1973 Gallup Poll: 11 % of Adult Americans questioned said
 >>that they had seen a UFO, themselves.

 >Now let me see, 1973 ay, that's what 28 years ago, are you still
 >basing your eyes wide shut policy on out of date data?

These Gallup Polls have a margin of error of 3 points. By the
early 90's the number had gotten up to 14 percent, but has since
dropped.

Do you have a recent Gallup Poll question on UFO witnesses which
is significantly different?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                          Secrecy News -- 05/22/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:55:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:23:36 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/22/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 22, 2001

**DOE IMPEDES ACCESS TO DECLASSIFIED FILES
**HIGH LEVEL PANEL ON COVERT ACTION
**ISRAEL: THE IMAGERY THREAT
**PROSECUTING THE DRUG WAR IN PERU
**EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ON ECHELON


DOE REVIEW IMPEDES ACCESS TO DECLASSIFIED FILES

Public access to certain historical records at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is being curtailed as
Department of Energy classification officials implement a 1998
law that required review of previously declassified records to
search for inadvertent releases of information about nuclear
weapons.

Researchers are finding bouquets of withdrawal slips in boxes
that formerly contained declassified documents.  Records that
had been on the shelves for years are suddenly unavailable.

"I have much more GAC [General Advisory Committee to the Atomic
Energy Commission] material at home than is now available at
NARA," said historian Priscilla J. McMillan, who is writing a
biography of J. Robert Oppenheimer.

Congress mandated the re-review of documents that were
declassified under the 1995 executive order 12958 after it was
learned that some information on nuclear weapons that was exempt
from declassification had been inadvertently released in the
declassification process because it was unmarked or misfiled.
Critics complained that the law was unnecessarily broad;  that
it failed to distinguish between information that was genuinely
sensitive and that which was merely classified; and that it was
an inappropriate diversion of resources.

But as bad as the law was, DOE has made it worse by extending
the re-review to include record groups that were declassified
prior to 1995.  Ms. McMillan and others found that various
Atomic Energy Commission records that were partially
declassified in the 1980s have now been completely removed from
public access.

That was not supposed to happen.  "The DOE reviewers are not to
be performing re-review of records declassified under a previous
executive order," a responsible Administration official told
Secrecy News.  But evidently that word has not filtered down to
the reviewers.

The conflict of interests engendered by the re-review of
previously declassified records might have been a perfect issue
for consideration by the Public Interest Declassification Board
that was proposed by Senator Daniel P. Moynihan and chartered by
legislation last year.  But that Board still does not exist, as
none of its members have been named by the President or the
congressional leadership.  Furthermore, "nobody's talking about
making it [the Board] happen," the Administration official said.

However, the issue is expected to be on the agenda of the next
State Department Historical Advisory Committee meeting on June
18-19.

It is the intent of NARA officials and DOE reviewers that the
re-review of declassified documents should "not seriously
inconvenience" researchers, the Administration official said.
"Reviewers are supposed to be giving priority to review
documents that researchers want to see," he said, while
acknowledging that not everyone had gotten the message and that
there was no formal process for researchers to request expedited
review.

The controversy over access to declassified files at the
National Archives was reported by George Lardner Jr. in the
Washington Post on May 19.  See "DOE Puts Declassification into
Reverse":

http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-dyn/articles/A46729-2001May18.ht
ml


HIGH LEVEL PANEL ON COVERT ACTION

A so-called "High Level Panel" has approved the acknowledgment
of some 15 cold war covert actions since it was first convened
in 1998, according to a tabulation of Panel decisions obtained
by Secrecy News.

The Panel, including representatives of the National Security
Council, State Department and Central Intelligence Agency, was
created to resolve disagreements over whether to acknowledge
covert actions in the Foreign Relations of the United States
series, which is the State Department's official record of U.S.
foreign policy.

The Panel agreed to formally acknowledge covert actions during
the Johnson Administration in Italy, the Philippines, Indonesia,
British Guiana, Pakistan, Iran, Dominican Republic, Thailand,
Israel-Jordan, Greece, Bolivia, and Chile.  A decision on
whether to acknowledge other covert actions in Vietnam and China
is still pending.

Covert actions in Mozambique and Panama during the 1960s were
"withdrawn" from consideration.  Why?  "I'll have to 'glomar'
that issue," an official said, meaning neither confirm nor deny
anything about it.

Acknowledgment of a covert action does not automatically
translate into declassification of documents.  Members of the
State Department Historical Advisory Committee complained last
December that "while the CIA was willing to acknowledge its
participation in Washington-level policy discussions, it seems
opposed to releasing information on CIA activities in another
country."

The Table setting forth the "Status of Johnson and Nixon Era
FRUS High Level Panel Covert Action Cases" is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/advisory/state/covert-hlp.html


ISRAEL: THE IMAGERY THREAT

While the benefits of increasing openness in national and
international affairs are largely self-evident, the risks are
sometimes overlooked.  For a variety of reasons, the transition
to greater "transparency" can be a turbulent and potentially
dangerous one.

A report in the Israeli press last week noted ominously that
"the [Palestinian Authority] and other hostile organizations
have recently obtained precise and clear high-quality aerial
photographs of the entire State of Israel, the West Bank, and
the Gaza Strip, including the settlements and the military
installations there."

The imagery, which was generated by Israel itself and shared
with mapping institutions abroad, reportedly was acquired by
Palestinian officials.  The Israeli concern is that such imagery
could be used by hostile forces to support targeting of Israeli
sites "with a precision of several centimeters."

See "We Are on the Palestinians' Map" by Reuven Shapira,
Ma'ariv, May 18 (translated by the CIA's Foreign Broadcast
Information Service with only minor errors):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/05/ma051801.html


PROSECUTING THE DRUG WAR IN PERU

"A plane was shot down.  Americans were killed. It was a plane
that was a civilian aircraft. Why is that classified? I don't
understand that," said Rep. Dan Burton at a May 1 hearing on the
downing of a plane carrying American missionaries over Peru on
April 20.  "This is not a national security issue. Why is that
classified? Why is it you guys can't tell us that? Speak to me."
See excerpts from the hearing transcript here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/05/hr050101.html

The policy of forceful interdiction of aircraft carrying
suspected drug traffickers is explored in an important story by
James Risen and Christopher Marquis in the New York Times today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/22/world/22DRUG-WORLD.html

The development of that policy during the 1990s is documented in
a National Security Archive briefing book prepared by Michael L.
Evans here:

http://www.nsarchive.org/NSAEBB/NSAEBB44/

The special 1994 legislation that provided legal immunity for
U.S. agents involved in the destruction of aircraft suspected of
illicit drug trafficking is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1994_rpt/s2182-1012.html


EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ON ECHELON

"The existence of a global system for intercepting private and
commercial communications (the Echelon interception system)...
is no longer in doubt," concludes a new draft report for the
European Parliament.

The May 4 draft report was prepared immediately before a
delegation from the European Parliament arrived in Washington
seeking meetings with U.S. intelligence officials.  The
delegation, which was rebuffed by the CIA, NSA and other
agencies, had sought to present its concerns over the reportedly
systematic interception (under the loose and inaccurate rubric
"Echelon") of private communications for economic espionage
purposes.

The draft report, which will be published in final form next
month, traces the evolution of the Echelon controversy and the
authors' understanding of the issue.  "Analysis has revealed
that the system cannot be nearly as extensive as some sections
of the media have assumed."

Perhaps most interesting, the report places Echelon in the
context of ongoing discussions over whether to establish a joint
intelligence entity for members of the European Union.

"Further cooperation between the intelligence agencies of the
Member States, well beyond the existing forms of cooperation,
cannot be avoided," the report concludes.  "It is inconceivable
that the intelligence services will be the last and only area
not affected by the process of European integration....  Strong
European industries need joint protection against economic
espionage from outside the European Union."

As for Britain, the United States' partner in many aspects of
security, "intelligence gathering may be precisely the issue
which forces the United Kingdom to decide whether its destiny is
European or transatlantic."

The text of the unpublished May 4 draft, authored by Gerhard
Schmid for the European Parliament's Temporary Committee on the
Echelon Interception System (867 kB PDF file), is posted here:

http://fas.org/irp/program/process/europarl_draft.pdf

******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org>
with this command in the body of the message: subscribe
secrecy_news [your email address]


Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email:  saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:26:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:33:42 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa

<snip>

 >Hi Alfred,

 >Thanks for your feedback.

 >Now, I don't want to burst your bubble but I found a curious
 >datum in my archives, and then again during my web search. You
 >can take a look at where it appears on the Net if you want at:

 >http://www.violations.dabsol.co.uk/weird/weirdpart3.htm

...And thanks for _your_ feedback, but don't worry about _my_
bubble, hoss, it EXPECTS a bursting - I count on it. It's a
potential elevation. Finding out you're wrong about something
can be a step up. Be that as it may, many of your points do more
to deepen the mystery than they do to validate your rational
skepticism. With a constantly receding (and evolving)estimation
of civilization's genesis by the propeller heads, and much of
that information contrary to the party line established view of
things - I am at once irritated and amused at the fearful
scurryings of the skepti-bunky scurrilous clutching imagined
safe realities to their withered chests. Just _one_ of these
things has to be true, and I've a sneaking suspicion that it's
not all bullshit. We're not likely to hear forthcoming
admissions in any case, but I'll keep my ears to the ground and
my eyes to the sky regardless - just in case something slips
through - you best do the same. Some of that stuff seems to slip
through via the good Swiss...

Lastly, most of it _is_ fake, Chris, I understand that, but some
of it is not. I think _you_ understand _that_. In as much as
I've had one career blow up in my face (and I think maybe the
second one on it's heels) for the completely justified passion
that this reality precipitates, I've nothing further to lose in
a quest of some kind of philosophical satisfaction regarding
this... teasing and ubiquitous anomalous. I might as well devote
my life to it. Moreover, if I have to choose between say, Gerald
Posner (an obfuscator for powerful sociopaths) and Erich Von
Daniken, I'm going to have to go with the Swiss every time. He
has an honest, more expansive, axe to grind. Besides - it may
be that Von Daniken has told the truth and a half to make up for
the mainstream skeptibunkies telling half the truth.

(snipped)


 >Then he contacted the Soviet writer who had
 >given the story to Von Daniken to check whether he had given Von
 >Daniken an accurate account. However the response was not as
 >expected; far from giving Von Daniken the story, Aleksandr
 >Kazantsev stated that Von Daniken had given it to him."

Forgetting for a moment the Chinese lack of response (no
information is not conclusive information, it is justtt no
information, and strangely puzzling for that), it might well
have been very convenient for Kazantsev to remember the story
the way he remembered it... and it's no stretch to think so, I
believe. My society compels me to look behind what its
institutions hold up as the truth. I didn't start out this way,
but many times bitten, many times shy. Unlike you, apparently, I
just can't be assured of the quality of many citations.
Especially the comforting ones. I can only think about what's to
be gained by maintaining the obvious conspiracy of reflexive and
sometimes completely irrational denial...

 >There's even a snappy photo of Erich von Darnitman himself which
 >you can copy, print and paste to your fridge door.

More misinformation? <g>... it was a terrible picture!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND - John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is - the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by scurrilous
skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                      Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:23:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:46:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:02:26 +0200
 >From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Hatch
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>But of course the main point is not the rug or the feedback
 >>>mechanism: the real point is the sighting itself and the
 >>>supporting documentation... which, so far as I know, is the
 >>>totality of information available on that sighting.

 >>I tried to pull in the relevant page of yours again, but
 >>again I got a 404 error:

 >Try http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue%20River.html

 >Additional (?) FOIA docs John Greenewald Jr's website
 >www.blackvault.com

 >http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb28.htm

 >http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb34.htm

 >Just the Cases - UFO sightings database
 >http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/ufodb.htm



Hello Daniel (and Bruce)

THAT URL came right in. Note the additional %20 between Rogue
and River in the address.

There's a lot there! I really should have dug out my sources
first, any one line synopsis is bound to be misleading.

http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue%20River.html

Perhaps %20 stands for some special character otherwise
disallowed.


Thanks!

- 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                         Re: Talk And Action - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:20:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:29:28 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 20:42:49 -0000

 >>Dennis,

 >>You certainly suggest over and over that "visitors" are unlikely
 >>because..., and human witnesses are fallible, so why bother.
 >>This obviously is my shorthand expression for your skepticism. I
 >>don't see you out there leading the charge for a more thorough
 >>scientific investigation.

 >Yes, I think visitors are unlikely...in large numbers.

 >Yes, I think human witnesses can be mistaken... that's not the
 >same as saying they're always mistaken.

 >As for your last sentence, I've done what I can, sometimes
 >publicly, sometimes behind the scenes. As editor of the MUFON
 >Journal for 12 years, I tried to publish the best material
 >available, regardless of which side of the fence it fell on. The
 >there's the book I co-edited, 1947-1997: Fifty Years of Flying
 >Saucers, and the one I co-authored, The Field Guide to UFOs.

 >Behind the scenes, I've lobbied that the MUFON database be made
 >available (free or at cost) as a research tool, either on the
 >web or on CD - or both. I think MUFON is finally getting around
 >to that.

 >I also pushed the MUFON Abduction Transcription Project - which
 >I still think is valuable, and should be continued, per the
 >trenchant criticisms made by David Hufford in his essay
 >published in the MIT proceedings. To which, I believe, both Budd
 >and David refused to contribute, for whatever reasons. I also
 >support a scientific analysis of the alien script samples
 >Hopkins and others may have collected. How is that one
 >languishing, btw?

 >My support in all those areas (and others) is that good science
 >begins at home.

Hi Dennis,
    Always a pleasure to discuss issues with such a forthright person, cynicism
notwithstanding. I certainly did not mean to suggest that you haven't contribute
d constructively to the UFO debate. You certainly have and, as you know, I suppo
rted you as MUFON UFO Journal editor and think you did a fine job, and contribut
ed to your Fortean Times book project. Your many other contributions I also reco
gnize.

All I was saying is that (at least lately) you have been coming across as skepti
cal to the point of debunking, and not willing even to suggest that there is any
thing important left to investigate. If this is merely your cynicism about the s
tate of ufology talking, many of us agree with that. The term "ufology" is a pre
tentious joke in the first place. However, the UFO data is another question (or
issue) altogether. There is no logical relationship between the silliness of ufo
logy and the potential importance and significance of the UFO data.

 >>>Assume all your UFO wishes come true. Then what? Will
 >>>tomorrow be any different from today?

 >>Once again, I have no idea what you are talking about here, or
 >>what sort of question this is (or purports to be). What are my
 >>"UFO wishes" and what do they have to do with anything? I wish
 >>the damn things had never shown up and dominated my life, mostly
 >>for ill. Does that answer your question? If not, please rephrase
 >>it and I'll try again.

 >I didn't mean to be so obtuse, and probably should have said
 >something like "ufology's wishes."

 >The point I was trying to make was that, most likely, nothing
 >fundamental would change in the wake of a Congressional
 >investigation, assuming one could ever be initiated. In fact, we
 >pretty much saw that with Roswell in the wake of both the Air
 >Force and GAO investigations. Neither lived up to "ufology's
 >wishes (or expectations)," so the field basically cried foul,
 >incomplete, sham, etc., and went about its business. Off the top
 >of my pointy head, I can't think of a single prominent ufologist
 >that came out and said, "hmm, you don't suppose these guys could
 >be on to something, do you?"

 >(Actually, I did, but that's one reason why I'm not a prominent
 >ufologist anymore. <BG!>)

 >So what would change with another "official" investigation,
 >assuming the official outcome would essentially remain
 >unchanged?

If you assume a negative or meaningless outcome, then obviously nothing would ch
ange. If you assume (as I do) that there are some very good unanswered questions
 that could be asked in a properly conducted inquiry (excluding axe-grinders lik
e Greer & Co.), then something important could result. There's no guarantee, of
course, and as I have often said about abduction reports, "skepticism is fully j
ustified."

 >Ufology will never be satisfied with conclusions that don't
 >match its own.

Screw "ufology."

 >Take an investigation into government secrecy. What answer would
 >ufology accept, other than an admission that, yes, Virginia,
 >there is a real MJ-12, or its real-world equivalent, and, yes,
 >it still exists, and, yes, it's still covering up the truth
 >about flying saucers. Denial of same would simply be interpreted
 >as backhanded "proof," or confirmation, of the cover up.

Again, you are flailing away against "ufology." Try focusing on
serious facts and issues instead and see whether it changes your
perspective.

 >And if aliens really were physically abducting us in large
 >numbers, do you think that MJ-12 or an equivalent entity would
 >allow itself to be hauled before Congress and ever admit same?

I have no idea whether there even is an MJ-12 or equivalent, but
I wasn't talking about trying to bring an invisible entity onto
the witness stand. There is ample visible, documented evidence
to justify hearings. I still (perhaps naively) have faith in
science, logic, and the democratic process.

 >At the end of the day, would another COMETA report or Sturrock
 >Panel fundamentally alter the chess pieces on the board and
 >their relative positions?

Funny you should ask that of an erstwhile chess player (now in
extreme rusty mode), but I still do have that faith cited above
that a real, thorough scientific investigation (not these
jury-rigged or superficial substitutes) could change the
picture. I like Brad Spark's image of ten fulltime Jim McDonald
equivalents going after the subject. But then, I knew Jim and
you didn't.

 >See, I told you I was cynical!

Life does give us ample reason to be cynical, speaking as a
senior citizen who has experienced a wide range of things
directly related to human attempts to deal with the UFO
phenomenon. I am deeply cynical about human nature. My cats are
so much more direct and honest than humans!


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 23

                            New Karl Pflock Book

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:24:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:11:27 -0400
Subject: New Karl Pflock Book



Dear colleagues

This is a shameless plug, but I do think most if not all of you
genuinely will find my new book to be of interest and a
worthwhile contribution to ufology, regardless of your views on
Roswell. As my publisher's jacket copy puts it, "The story is
not what you think it is, no matter what you believe happened -
or didn't":

Roswell: Inconvenient Facts And The Will To Believe
By Karl Pflock

With a foreword by bestselling science and science-fiction
writer Dr. Jerry Pournelle Hardcover, 331 pp., photos,
appendicies, and index; $25 (Prometheus Books)

Official publication date is June 1, but many bookstores already
have it on their shelves. If your favorite bookseller doesn't
yet have it in stock, they can order it for you or you can order
it yourself right now  -

- From ufology's own Arcturus Books (Bob Girard) at
rgirard@aol.com or 561-398-0796 (9 a.m. - 6 p.m. EDT, M-F), who
is stocking it and whom I urge everyone in ufology to support;
or

- Online from Amazon.com, BarnesandNoble.com, other online
booksellers; or

- Directly from the publisher via their 24-hour, toll-free order
number, 1-800-421-0351.

Books make great gifts (hint, hint).


Thanks!


Cheers,

Karl









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:36:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:41:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:43:22 -0400

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
 >>occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
 >>point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
 >>The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
 >>quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
 >>by him, me maybe more so than others.

 >I want to add my own voice here, to say that Kevin most
 >certainly has done what he says. I was astonished when I read Ed
 >Gehrman's statement.

 >In this sorry field of ufology, where everyone, believers and
 >skeptics, acts as if they're always right, Kevin is one of the
 >few people who'll admit when he's wrong.

 >Greg

Greg,

I agree! Now, all he has to do is disavow Roswell in its
entirety. <BG!>

Glenn Dennis is now down the drain, so maybe we can begin next
with Frank Kaufmann, followed by Jim Ragsdale and Frankie Rowe.
Who first turned them up and how credible do they remain? And
then there are those nuns and that anonymous archeologist. Not
to mention a couple of death bed confessions to the effect that,
"cough, cough, it's all true, every single bit of it...
(croak)," never mind that Randle himself has already admitted
that _all_ of it couldn't conceivably have been true, viz. his
own retraction of the Dennis  testimony.

As for that there Roswell Encyclopedia, might ask Randle whether
he ever interviewed Lorenzo Kent Kimball, and if not, why not?
Robert Todd could have given him the following URL, as he did
everyone on this list:

http://www.inconnect.com/~lorenzok/roswell.html

But maybe Randle has never heard of Todd, either.

Maybe we should ask, instead, how he came up with the name of
the individual who was reported to have conducted the alien
autopsies, while managing to overlook Kimball and Col. Comstock,
both of whom outranked the individual Randle/Schmitt "chose" as
their autopser, and both of whom denied that any alien cadavers
passed through Roswell while they were on duty.

IMHO, Randle has got a lot to answer for re Roswell, and Glenn
Dennis ain't the half of it. He's only the beginning. And that
goes for Friedman, too, who can't quite rise to the occasion and
admit, "yes, Gerald Anderson took me and my co-author, Don
Berliner, for suckers." As in we were too willing to believe any
and everything that came our way.

But you will nevert, ever, hear one of these gentlemen say,
"yes, I blew it." Not when it comes to sancrosanct Roswell.
Anywhere but there.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                           Crop Formations and F&M

From: Tim Haley <TimHaley@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 22:48:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:43:59 -0400
Subject: Crop Formations and F&M


Hello all,

On a recent visit to www.cropcircleconnector.com, I noticed the
following statement in reference to a recent crop formation:

"We must inform anyone who is planning to go and see the first
event, not to take for granted that the general public have
access to this field. Lets not forget the Foot and Mouth
situation is still with us, so we must all act responsibly.
Further information we have been given, is that Old Winchester
Hill is still closed, and there are Foot & Mouth signs
everywhere."

I wonder how the Foot & Mouth problem might affect this season's
crop formations and subsequent analysis. Indeed, I suspect the
numbers of human-made formations to be significantly less and
that the collection of samples for scientific analysis might
also be hampered. Any word on this from the "Circle Makers"?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                            The Barnaul Sighting

From: Paul Stonehill <rurc@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:51:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:46:15 -0400
Subject: The Barnaul Sighting


Dear colleagues,

Lest there be unrealistic expectations about the object sighted
in Barnaul (whether on the 22nd of May, or the earlier one in
January of this year), please allow me to share the following
with you. Mr. Eduard Gozhin, a UFO researcher from Siberia, has
stated in a letter to the RUFORS Russian Table today that a book
published in Tomsk (Russia), provides an adequate explanation.

The title of that book is 'Monitoring Atmosferi Sibirskogo
Regiona', and it contains a chapter regarding the January
sighting.

Whilst Mr. Gozhin does not possess the book, he was able to
summarize the explanation contained therein. The UFO is but an
electromagnetic "clot" in the atmosphere. There is a laboratory,
dedicated to the research of similar phenomena. Such phenomena
(systems, per Mr. Gozhin) are caused by human activities - an
interference with ecological equilibrium in nature. Basically,
Mr. Gozhin wanted to indicate that such 'UFOs' are studied by
Russian scientists, and the latter have achieved some results in
their work.

Hence, he is of the opinion that the Baranaul Object is no UFO,
but a phenomenon created on Earth.

I am actually working on an article about the Barnaul Object. I
thank Mr. Gozhin. Once again, the Round Table of the RUFORS
comes through. Alas, Mr. Gozhin is not fluent in English; yet,
should you want to reach him, I am certain Mr. Subbotin, whom I
had mentioned earlier in my postings, would help you.


Paul Stonehill

Russian Ufology Research Center









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 00:10:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:49:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:02:26 +0200
 >From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Additional (?) FOIA docs John Greenewald Jr's website
 >www.blackvault.com

 >http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb28.htm

 >http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb34.htm


Thanks for alerting me to these documents. I did not have them,
since they were in the WPAFB section of the BB/AFOSI file. (I
searched west coast districts that could have investigated. The
name of a witness is clearly present in one document. Now we
know that the sketch which appears in the Special Report was
actually drawn by a witness and not by one of the Battelle
analysts simply based on the description. I copied the .gif
documents, inverted them (black to white) and printed out.

There is a list of names of people who got copies of a letter
written by Mr. Don(?) Murphy(?), Denphy(?) whatever, is very
interesting. I note that Vandenburg was on the list a mere 7
months (?) after he rejected the Estimate of the Situation (we
are told) Wonder if a copy could be found in his files or in the
files of the ther men Hunsaker

etc.

Is that Edward U Condon, fifth name down the list?

Will post this material as an update to my web site
presentation.!

Looks as if we need some group effort to read the unreadable
letter... although I suspect it says little more than is already
available in the interview reports I posted.

I get as follows:

When my attention was called to an object in the sky it appeared
like a round shiny object such as a round mirror with the sun
shining on it and the mirror standing on edge. With the naked
eye the appearance never changed. It appeared to be stationary
when I first saw it. There (?) XXX XXXXX party XXXXX XX XXXXX a
pair of 8-power glasses XXX this time.
.................................right ................angle
........... ..With the glasses there was no glare. It
..............................little thicker in the
center....................... . The pancake part seemed to be
slightly oblong .................... of being on edge it was
lying flat. I would say it was XX or XX feet in diameter. The
edge had a XXXward round XXX and .... 1 foot thick. The trailing
edge as it traveled had a rough appearance. As it traveled I
noticed a fin starting from XXX about .......... as it reached
the trailing edge of the pancake but it did not protrude past
the edge The fin appeared small in relation to the rest. The fin
was XXXX on XXX and ... radius(?) on the side. The fin looked
failrly thick midship and very thin at the rear,.

It looked as if it was made out of aluminum and some of the
metal looked a little dirty. I looked close for propellors or a
jet stream but could see none. We listened very close for a
noise but there was no sound of any kind. It appeared to be at
an altitude of 5000 feet. I looked at it about two minutes or
more with the glasses until it disappeared in the distance. The
last 1/2 minute or so I watched it, it looked as though its
speed was about like a jet plane. There were five of us watching
it. two of us looked at it with the 8 power glasses. I could see
no openings such as doors or windows of any mind

Also observed by XXXXXXX drafting section) and three others.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                          Filer's Files #21 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 00:15:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:00:49 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #21 -- 2000


Filer's Files #21 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
May 22, 2001, Sponsored by Electronic Arts; Majorstar@Aol.com.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,

GEORGE A. FILER V my new grandson was born on May 9, 2001, in
Mt. Holly, New Jersey weighing 7 pounds 14 ounces! Mother,
grandson, my son, and grandfather are doing fine.

UFOs REPORTED OVER ENGLAND, FRANCE, BRAZIL AND US. UFOs are
observed over New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia,
Texas, Georgia, California, and Alaska.

DISCLOSURE PROJECT AND THE WRIGHT BROTHERS

On May 9, 2001, I spoke at the National Press Club to several
hundred reporters with twenty former government employees
attempting to prove the reality of UFOs. Although the several
hundred reporters and television cameraman were enthusiastic,
the national news coverage was less than expected. Ranger
wrote and reminded me that when the Wright Brothers had their
first powered manned flight, they sent out a press release
first and the only press person to attend was a woman reporter
from a local newspaper. After the flight she returned to the
paper and wrote the story. When she turned it in to the editor
"She Was Fired" because after all we all know that humans
cannot fly. She obviously was lying and of course her story
never ran! Two years after their first flight and many longer
successful flights the Scientific American Magazine was still
claiming it was a hoax, and they weren't really flying! The
Wright Brothers had to take their plane to New York City and
fly in circ! les over the city to convince people they could
actually fly!! Therefore, human nature hasn't changed much
since then. Thanks to ranger116@webtv.net

Editor's Note: We encourage the New York reporters to look up
over New York, particularly at sunrise and sunset for the UFOs.

NEW YORK ABDUCTION

RUSSELL PARK -- Paul M. Davis writes, We had seen several UFOs
in the park and experienced twenty minutes of missing time.
Several weeks later, I began having awful demonic alien
nightmares. I became a nervous fearful person soon after. I
have been put on medication to keep me calm. I was able to
recall the incident fully. The alien craft came down. It was
noiseless. I assume it had landing gear because it was not
resting on its belly. I saw a ramp open as if inviting me in.
I went up the ramp ducking as I went in, the floor of the ramp
felt strange on the bottom of my feet. Almost like a skin more
then a metal ramp. I went inside where I noticed it was
somewhat dimly lit. I did not see my cousin Israel anywhere.

Before me were huge octagonal metallic walls or doors, about 9
feet high. The inside of the craft appeared to be larger then
the outside of the craft. Each wall had a large symbol that
looked like a different complex pattern burned into it. I
began to receive messages in my head and turned to see three
gray aliens with large heads and child like bodies sitting
around some sort of biological hi tech computer device.
Wearing tight diver like suits, they did not look up at me. I
asked questions with my mind. I got answers quickly. I asked,
"What are you and where are you from?" I was informed that
these creatures were advanced bipedal animals with the soul or
spirit of demons with great scientific knowledge that we on
earth could not begin to understand. Their physics seems to
have no limits. I was very shocked by all this and prayed to
God for help. I began fighting heart palpitations, shallow
breathing, and tunnel vision. I fought to keep my senses.

The ship was surprisingly simple and the floor had an
interesting structure and design similar to cutting an orange
in half and seeing those lines coming out from the center of a
single focused point. There were no windows but I believe they
were behind the octagonal doors. I was told that each symbol
on the doors was of an advanced demonic language. One symbol
was the equivalent of a massive database of knowledge. I asked
them, "How do you navigate through space and survive?" I was
told that they used their minds for navigational purposes. A
biological to digital control as best as they could explain it
to me. It took three aliens to properly fly and navigate this
craft for interstellar travel.

I could see the top of a cylinder that was like looking at an
advanced 3-d computer monitor with images stacked over images,
like a hologram. The screen was round like a computer monitor
that was laid face up. I saw star charts or lines connecting
constellations and it had an alien font or hieroglyphic data on
the outer rim of this device. The aliens told me that they
made it work by placing their hands on what I could only
describe as a control panel. The aliens placed their hands
into the indentation that matched their hand shape perfectly.
They had two fingers with an opposable thumb. It was clearly
an advanced computer keyboard. Thanks to MUFON's Director John
Schuessler for this sighting report that is under further
investigation.

MARYLAND RECTANGULAR UFO

BALTIMORE -- Bill and Linda Bean write that he and his wife
witnessed a UFO on May 7, 2001, at 11:25 PM. They were on
their way home driving on I- 695 North, and as they approached
Exit 12 they noticed a very slow, almost hovering craft. It
appeared to be about 15,000 feet in the air, and was
descending. The object had two big white very bright likes and
they were blinking on and off once per second. They continued
to watch but could not pull over because the shoulder was too
narrow. They approached Exit 15, and the UFO descended to be
less than a 1000 feet in altitude. The lights on the bottom of
the craft were red and were constant without blinking. Bill
says, "I could see structure behind the bottom lights and as we
passed the next exit, I could see the unlit backside of the
craft. The street and building lights provided enough light
for us to see the structure of the UFO, it was rectangular in
shape and about the height of a double-decker bus. The craft
under stru! cture was smaller than the top and came down to
45-degree angles on the sides. The angles were going outward
and there were four red lights on this part of the craft. The
UFO descended to 500 feet and the lights got even brighter. We
finally lost sight of it behind some trees off of Rt. 40 West.
"I am sure that other drivers saw this craft since it was too
big, low, and bright to be unnoticed," says Bill. If anyone
else out there saw this craft, please E-mail Bill Bean at
bllin@erols.com

VIRGINIA UFO SIGHTINGS

BUENA VISTA -- Mr. Wolfman writes in last week's files you told
of a huge Flying Triangle over Buena Vista, where I had a
similar sighting a month earlier in mid-April of 1998. My wife
and I live on the side of a hill, which overlooks Buena Vista
in Rockbridge County. Shortly after 9:00 PM, I set out to
drive to the nearby Hilltop Gas Station on Route 60. As I was
getting into my car, I noticed a bright orange light in the sky
to the northeast of my home. At first I thought it was a
bright star, but I noticed that the light was traveling south.
I observed the light for about 30 seconds and realized that the
"plane" did not have any FAA lights at all. Only a single
orange light, about the brightness of aircraft landing lights
passing in front of me in a straight line at 1500 feet off the
ground. I drove to the gas station and watched some more. I
called the cashier out to see and even under the bright store
lights, we could make out the UFO light, which was moving
south! in a slow and deliberate manner. The light did not
produce any sound. Another 45 seconds, the light made
"clearing turns" which I am sure you are familiar, and
continued slowly on its original course. The cashier asked me
a question and the light was gone.

I was so stunned that I called the County sheriff's office. I
didn't tell them I saw a "UFO," I told them I saw a low flying
plane running in violation of FAA regulations, with no engine
noise, and possibly in distress. The dispatcher advised me to
call Roanoke Airport but I couldn't reach anyone so I contacted
Langley Air Force Base, which is on the coast. The dispatcher
said they couldn't do anything unless there was a crash and
advised calling the base. I reached Langley's Control Tower
Sergeant and told him what I saw, keeping to my belief that
there was possibly a distressed or downed aircraft in the area.
He switched me to a speakerphone, I assume so others could
listen. The guy had me run through the whole thing three
times, and kept asking me "what did you think it was?" I was
very concerned that there could be a plane down in the woods,
but it sounded like someone in the background was laughing.
The Sergeant told me that there were no aircraft in the skies
abo! ve Rockbridge County, and all of his planes were on the
ground, and that I was seeing things. Thanks to Wolfman

CENTRAL VIRGINIA TRIANGLE -- Matthew Moriarty writes that at
11:00 PM, May 10, 2001, I was out with the dogs and noticed an
out of place triangular pattern of stars near the planet
Saturn. To my amazement the triangular arrangement began to
rotate counterclockwise very slowly. My attention was riveted
looking to see if the nearby stars remained fixed and if I
could discern some definite object within the triangular star
pattern. I could not see any actual object, but the triangular
pattern stopped it's rotation and proceeded to slowly move in
the southwest direction. I watched it disappear over a tree
line and that was it. The configuration was huge spanning the
size of my hand at arm's length and it must have been very
high. Thanks to Matthew Moriarty rommell43@nexet.net

FLORIDA/GEORGIA SKY LIGHTS UP

JACKSONVILLE -- James Montgomery wrote: "I don't think anyone
has ever seen what we saw that night 40 miles north of the
city." I was in a mortar platoon in the USMC, and saw the use
of many different armaments, and night illumination, and
nothing comes close. Many of my fellow truckers, that deliver
our nations freight 365 days a year also saw the strange
lights. On May 3, 2001, about 2:30 AM, I was heading north on
Interstate 95, near the Florida State line. Over Georgia I saw
a very intense blue light, as bright or brighter than lightning
in the upper atmosphere. At arm's length, my thumbnail covered
up the blue light. This large blue light lasted for only a
fraction of a second, followed by an orange very intense light.
The size of the orange light was four times bigger than the
blue light.

The orange light and was oblong, and the blue light appeared to
be round. The blue and orange lights slightly over lapped,
appearing to touch, but again the blue light flashed first and
the orange light flashed in a second. It was obvious this was
in the outer atmosphere, and was not a natural phenomenon. The
entire atmosphere, covering the whole southeastern hemisphere
flashed an unnatural sun bright orange. The bright orange
light lasted 3 to 4 seconds and was like daytime in my truck
and everywhere I looked, but a very strange light, again very
orange.

I thought it was a nuclear blast. Truck traffic was heavy, and
many of us began to speculate as to what it was over the radio.
We speculated it might have been a test of SDI. A second blue
light object causing the brilliant flash may have hit the first
light above our atmosphere creating the tremendous energy.
Thanks to James Montgomery <monjamf@northstate.net and
Frederick M. Fox <telarion@earthlink.net

MINNESOTA UFO SIGHTING

AFTON -- John Osborn writes, "I was on the back deck with a
friend at 7:50 PM on May 18, 2001. The contrast of the green
leaves against the blue sky was quite beautiful." I noticed an
unusually bright star that was visible even though the sun was
still up. The light wasn't moving and I was able to point it
out to my friend. Observing with the binoculars the light was
too large to be a star. I got my telescope and looked at the
light almost directly overhead and saw a round blue white
object. It was whiter around the edge and darker in the
middle, giving the impression of a translucent soap bubble. It
did not appear to move, but suddenly it flew very quickly out
of the scopes field of view. It was not a satellite because
they move too fast, nor a plane because those move and they're
not round. It wasn't a star or a balloon because it was
stationary for too long and later moved too fast.

In the summer of 1964, I saw my first UFO when I was seven.
I'm now 44 years old. The sun was low with no clouds, but it
was still daylight. My four friends were playing when I looked
up and saw a round object. It was stationary and not rotating.
It was bluish-white, the same color as the moon and almost as
bright. I could clearly see dark ring-shaped markings on its
whiter background. There was a large ring in the center and
five smaller rings spaced evenly around, but not touching, the
center ring. I could see this object *absolutely clearly*.
Its apparent size was almost the size of a quarter at arm's
length. It made no sound. I pointed to it and my friends all
stopped to look. Then someone tagged me and it was gone.
Thanks to Whitley Strieber and john@osborntech.com

MISSOURI BRIGHT MOVING LIGHT FOLLOWS TRUCK

CHILLICOTHE -- Nancy writes that on April 28, 2001, I was in a
semi-truck with my husband going down Highway 65 in Northern
Missouri. The night was dark but the stars were not out yet.
I watched out my window as we drove as the big Very Bright
Light seemed to follow our truck from the West. It was just
shining like the moon, but this was staying beside us miles and
miles away. I finally told my husband about the light and he
saw it. So finally I kept telling him, "We turned clear around
and it was still on the side of us." We stopped to wash our
truck to at the car wash and the bright light stopped with us.
I said, "Look it is still there, we should have lost site of it
long time ago, it has been 80 to 90 miles since I started
watching this." My husband opened his door to get out and the
light seemed to turn and show a red glow and head due west and
flew out of site," said Nancy. Thanks to Nancy
walkerja@klmtel.net

TEXAS UFO SPOTTED OVER HOUSTON BY COMMUTERS

HOUSTON -- Jerome Reyes writes that on May 11.2001, his uncle a
48-year-old computer programmer along with several other
commuters spotted a UFO about 5:00 AM while riding a Houston
Metro bus. The bus was leaving from the park and was making
its morning trip to downtown. Several commuters spotted a
glowing sphere moving in the dark morning sky. The sphere
looked like a star but was moving. It was definitely no plane.
He pointed out the UFO to the women next to him and she saw it
too, as did several other people on the bus.

The UFO started following the bus for several minutes then flew
away. On May 14, three mornings later, my uncle saw it again,
a strange light in shape of a sphere in the sky. When he
arrived at the park and ride to wait for his bus he could still
see it, and pointed it out to an older gentlemen who had also
seen it earlier. The older man said, "Oh yeah there it is
again!" My uncle is not someone to make up this kind of thing
and has not told many people. Thanks to min.ppi@attglobal.net
(Jerome Reyes)

CALIFORNIA UFO DOWNS ICBM

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE -- Dr. Robert Jacobs writes, "My
"interest" in the UFO subject dates back to 1964 when, while
Officer-in-Charge of Photo-optical Instrumentation at
Vandenberg AFB, I captured an "event" on film. That "event"
was a saucer-shaped object firing at one of our sub orbital
dummy nuclear warheads on its way to a target at Eniwetok
Lagoon. Subsequently I was ordered to take part in a cover-up.
My story appeared in the MUFON Journal, as well as on the
television program, "Sightings," and most recently I testified
on video for journalist Leslie Kean. Thanks to Bob Jacobs,
Ph.D. Professor and Coordinator of Production Department of
Communication.

ALASKA CASE FLYING TRIANGLE UPDATE

SEWARD -- Michael Harman writes that my contact in Alaska has
told me he has now located a husband and wife team who
witnessed the triangles the same night Robert Mackey saw them.
Now we have Robert, his wife, his son, and two other residents
of Seward all claiming to have seen the Flying Triangles. I
have to lean in favor of Roberts story on this, his evidence is
mounting. He has also scanned in two drawings made by his young
son and himself. Thanks to Mike_Harman@rocketmail.com.

BRAZIL POSSIBLE UFO CRASH

FEIRA DE SANTANA -- Researcher Don Ware reports I received a
three-page report by Emanuel Pardnhos and Alberto Romero about
the 12 January 12, 1995, crash of a small saucer with two
different alien beings. The report was accompanied by nine
excellent drawings by Beto Lima depicting the major events.
Mr. BPL saw the saucer crash in a lake. A port opened and two
creatures emerged. One was about one meter tall with a large
bald head and big eyes and the other was a bit larger and hairy
except for the hands and face. BPL used a long stick to pull
them to shore, and then he took them to his house.

One report by an anonymous soldier of the 35th Infantry
Battalion said he was part of the team that went in trucks to
the farmhouse and carried the creatures out. The hairy one
protested. One soldier made the sign of the cross and said,
"These are animals from another world." Then Navy intelligence
officers arrived in a car and took control of the event. The
saucer, being very light, was put on a truck. Then a
helicopter arrived and took the two aliens. They were all told
not to talk about it. After hearing a report on a local radio
station, another soldier wrote to Mr. Romero and confirmed that
it did happen. Thanks to Donald M. Ware donware@earthlink.net

SCOTLAND AND UK UFO NEWS BLACKOUT

EDINBURGH -- Andrew Hennessey writes that between May 5 and 10
UFO sightings were made everyday. Paul MacDonald reports a
massive Black Flying Triangle over the Vale of Leithen north of
Edinburgh. The next night he saw a massive Flying Triangle
glide over the Firth of Forth estuary that headed down the
coastline. It was veiled in a cloud with strobe lights jumping
about over a massive area of cloud. Paul makes medieval
weapons in the heart of Edinburgh - and in broad, daylight --
he saw three greys in a glass bubble, which sat in the middle
of a plate-like rim. Another two friends were in bed, one woke
up to see her boyfriend astrally projecting out of his body by
sitting up -- and there -- his features appeared like a mask on
a 3.5 foot grey-like being, and when she screamed -- it was as
if the grey screamed too. It was a rather a comical moment she
afterwards reflected.

JOPPA - At the port amazing pearly lights descended from the
sky -- splashing into 8 balls of light at rooftop level.
Twenty miles south of Edinburgh people stopped at the roadside
to watch a flashing lights and strange window like objects
flying about. The witnesses were accosted by black 2
dimensional window/black squares with a bar of light inside it.
It moved rapidly over the fields and seemed to check you out
before it goes away. There have been as many as three of these
objects. They are some kind of ship -- or maybe some kind of
surveillance device. These hills are legendary for the faerie
tribes called Sidhe [pronounced she) that inhabit them. Thanks
to Andrew Hennessey

FRANCE UFO

MARSEILLES -- Paul Harman's writes, In 1974 I was a seaman
aboard the 70.000-ton oil tanker Diloma owned by Shell-tankers.
We were dry-docking in Marseilles, France. About October 17,
1994, eight crewmembers were on the aft deck waiting for water
to fill the dry-dock. It was about 1:30 PM with a clear blue
sky and a bright light was hovering above the city. It was
flying at 150 meters in altitude and one or two kilometers from
the dry-dock. The light was as bright as a star and had a
diameter 1/4 of the full moon. We didn't hear any sound coming
from that strange light so it was unlikely to be a helicopter
that can easily be heard at that distance. Our nautical
officer was quite sure this light was neither a star nor a
planet.

After thirty minutes the light was still in the same position
and we saw a smaller light that moved slowly out of the city
towards the big light. On approaching the big light the small
light reduced speed and very slowly it entered into the big
light. We were all stunned. Five minutes later, the light
flew at incredible speed straight up and disappeared making the
sound of a zipper. I was a 17-year-old boy and I knew nothing
about UFO's. After my sighting I started reading a lot about
UFO's and I became a real and strong believer. I saw so I
believe! Thanks to Paul Harman's, Paulharmans@cs.com

MONOLITHS OF MARS

Mars is filled with strange anomalies that point to possible
alien artifacts from ancient Martian civilizations, possible ET
bases and even modern Martian life. The Mar's artifacts infer
that life forms have simply moved underground on Mars. I have
been in large underground installations in Turkey, and the US.
Caves in Puerto Rico reach a startling twenty stories high.
Asteroids and heavy radiation have bombarded Mars, so it is
quite logical for any life forms to move underground. New
images show perfectly regular prismatic structures are embedded
in the Martian surface. These monoliths similar to the carved
rocks at Stonehenge in England are inexplicable as carved
natural phenomena. I have called JPL and spoken with some of
their scientists with doctorates. I have only a master's degree
but with experience in photo analysis.

It is reasonable that within nature we might see something that
looks like a human face or a frog in the natural landscape.
However, it seems beyond reason that and statistical
mathematics that the large numbers of cultural-like features on
Mars can be natural. I see what could be described as a fort
and with imagination an alien base. I see possible ancient
cities and fortifications. In the spring, Mars turns green
near the poles as the ice melts. In close inspection of the
green areas we see branches like plants. Many plants and trees
grow with a trunk, branches and smaller twigs that hold leaves
or needles as in pine trees. With the coming of spring, green
plant like foliage or moss is growing on the planet's surface.
Mars photographs show a plant like design where only snow or
landscape was present. It is my opinion that plants are
growing there. NASA's answer is "No comment"? I feel the
scientists at JPL must be able to see what I can see. Forget
the Mars Fac! e the moment, that may only be a freak of nature,
but there is an ancient city around it.

Critical analyses by NASA cannot reveal what is apparent until
it becomes politically acceptable to find life on Mars. My
geologist friends and I can think of no natural process or
photographic problem that can explain these anomalies. It is
my opinion that Mars once had life and a civilization. We can
assume that there are intelligent races besides the human race.
The same concepts or religions that built the Mars Monoliths
may have carried this knowledge to Earth. Because of my
personal encounters with UFOs I believe they exist, therefore I
interpret the images very differently than someone who feels
alien life they does not exist. Each person carries prejudices
that can color their objectiveness, but I'm 90% sure life
existed on Mars and probably still does.

THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION

David E. Twichell writes, "The ancient astronaut and Biblical
UFO hypotheses are not new. However, no one seems to want to
take the matter to the next logical step. If Ezekiel's, "wheel
within a wheel," and Moses', "pillar of fire and cloud," were
forerunners of today's UFOs, then the Star of Bethlehem and the
brilliant cloud to which Jesus ascended must be treated in the
same vein. When Biblical descriptions of anomalous aerial
phenomena are overlaid on that of modern-day UFO reports, the
picture seems to meld as one. Once the evidence has been
presented, the reader is led to a conclusion that is at best
convincing and at least thought provoking. Are you willing to
risk having your worldview shaken? Read the preface free at:
http://hometown.aol.com/fi4mufon/myhomepage/index.html To order
your copy of THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION, go to:
http://www.buybooksontheweb.com Or Save the shipping charges
and order your autographed copy by sending a check or money
order for $13.95 (US) per copy to: David Twichell, P.O. Box 511,
Trenton MI. 48183-0511

PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO photographs
available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy
Commander Graham Bethune. $10.00. Send check or money order to
G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055. CD OF
FILER'S FILES for the last four years 1997 through 2000 is
available for $25.00. Both for $30.00.

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
were caught on recent Shuttle video footage. Jeff has over an
hour-long tape of UFOs shot in space. Jeff spends hundreds of
hours watching the shuttle broadcasts from space and is now an
expert on NASA missions and even those onboard the shuttle are
unlikely to see what Jeff does. Using Jeff's directions you
will be able to learn the difference between space junk, ice
crystals and real UFOs. One segment has 24 UFOs watching the
shuttle from space. I feel confident we could go into a court
of law and convince any jury, UFOs are moving around our Earth.
Send $25 to: Jeff Challender 2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento,
California 95833-2011.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $30 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2001 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the
files on their Web Sites provided they credit the newsletter and
its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. Caution: Most of these are initial reports and
require further investigation. These reports and comments are
not necessarily the official MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters
to Majorstar@Aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants
permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state
if you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.


If you want to be removed form the list, you can unsubscribe
your email address from the same place you subcribed.
http://www.filersfiles.com/index.shtml#subscribe







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 01:11:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:03:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:43:27 +0200
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jean van Gemert <j.vangemert@chello.nl>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:08:59 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

 >>Yes, because Venus was at that very moment a bright point of
 >>light in the Eastern sky in the direction that the two hour chase
 >>occurred. And the object disappeared with dawn. Also, the
 >>witnesses didn't report another bright light, Venus, in the same
 >>direction.

 >You claim the officers didn't report "Venus, another bright
 >light, in the same direction". Obviously you never bothered to
 >read any of the case materials, Bob, a trait which seems so
 >typical of you.

 >Spaur in his conversation with Quintanilla notes that he saw a
 >bright spot in the sky that was "real bright", aside from
 >seeing the UFO, which Hynek then identifies as being Venus. [1]
 >In short, Spaur did see Venus in _addition_ to the UFO.

No, that was Mercury, just then about zero magnitude, and about
a handspan away from Venus. Venus, however, was about -4 mag, 30
times brighter and gleaming in the sky.

Mercury right now is visible to the right of Jupiter low in the
evening sky just after dark, for an idea of what he might have
seen. Look quickly in clear skies because it will be moving down
toward the Sun in a few days.

 >There are many other parts of the observations which makes it
 >impossible to pigeonhole the case into your neat little Venus
 >hypothesis.

On the contrary, this demonstrates that, as astronomer Hynek
realized, Venus _was_ the UFO, at least during the chase.

<snip>

 >The UFO was never described as just a 'bright [pinpoint] light'.

Of course not, he was describing what he thought was a UFO.
However,

 >Here's a snippet from Spaur's own words:

 >"It's about fifty feet across,

How did he determine this? A mystery object at an unknown
distance and he knew it's size? I don't think so. But, if he
assumed that it was this size and at a distance as he was
chasing it, he might have followed Venus for 80 miles into the
next state.

 >and I can just make out a dome or
 >something on the top, but that's very dark. The bottom is real
 >bright; it's putting out a beam of light that makes a big spot
 >underneath. It's like it's sitting on the beam.

Classic Venus, sparkling in the early morning skies to a witness
who thinks it's a real object a few miles away. The dome is a
slightly astigmatic image of the planet and the beam it's
sitting on is caused by diffraction of the image by his
eyelashes.

 >It was overhead
 >a minute ago, and it was as bright as day here: Our headlights
 >didn't make nearly as much light as it did. And this is no
 >helicopter or anything like that; it's perfectly still and it
 >just makes a humming noise." [2]

Yes, and it was 50 feet across.

 >From the transcript with Quintanilla it's obvious that during
 >parts of the chase, the object is at a low altitude and passes
 >over several other police cars.

The unknown object, of unknown size, and hence unknown distance,
was of course assumed to have passed over those in front. Hell,
it was 50 feet across, remember, and they chased it four more
than an hour and never caught up to it?

<snip>

 >Now, would you please explain to List members how Venus can:

 >- maneuver overhead
 >- make a humming noise
 >- put out a beam of light
 >- make it seem as bright as day
 >- appear as a large glowing object, fifty feet across

Well, if you had chased Venus across two states, I suppose that
it could well nigh be capable of anything. It's all in the eyes
of the beholders, my friend.

Spaur said that he saw the same UFO on another night. I wonder
which direction he was looking and whether anybody else was
excited that time?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 04:33:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:38:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:05:17 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:06:11 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:52:24 +0100

 ><snip>

 >>So they knew it was bogus but wanted to document the nutball so
 >>they could trumpet his crazy testimony to the detriment of
 >>accurate witnesses who were shunted aside and left uncounted. So
 >>that debunkers could forever after seize upon crackpot testimony
 >>such as this as Exhibit A in the Case Against the UFO.>>


 >Brad:

 >It isn't enough that UFO proponents insist on generalizing about
 >what is shown by the "unidentified" residue, while refusing to
 >consider the implications of the IFOs, now "bogus" cases which
 >turn out to be IFOs are not even to be considered an IFO?

 >C'mon, Brad. How did this incident come to the attention of the
 >Condon people if it wasn't a "UFO" report? The witnesses
 >obviously didn't consider it "bogus", or they wouldn't have
 >bothered to tell anybody.


Bob,

Do you just deliberately delete all the identifying data from my
posts (that this was Case 45 in the Condon Report pp. 395-6) to
make it difficult for me and others to reference the facts??? I
consider that deliberate obstructionism.

This was a crooked fraud by the Condon Committee itself which
knew damned well from the start that this was a hot-air balloon
prank right from the night of the sighting in Jan 3, 1968, when
the call came from the "several persons" (possibly the hoaxers
themselves at the launching site) who described an "illuminated
transparent object drifting over the town" of Castle Rock,
Colo., virtually in the Condon Project's backyard. Notice
nothing about a "UFO" in those words used to paraphrase the
_accurate_ witn ess reporting in the Condon Report:


"illuminated transparent object drifting over the town" (CR p.
  395)


But the Condon investigators deliberately ignored these
_accurate_ witnesses on the night of the sighting. Here they had
an Early Warning Network to try to rush investigators to the
scene of a UFO sighting hopefully in time to catch the actual
UFO while it was still there - but they waited till the "the
following evening" (CR p. 396) to go to their own neighborhood
of north-central Colorado just 50 miles away, indicating they
knew it wasn't a real UFO or anything close to a real UFO so it
could wait a day.

They waited until "the following evening" to single out and
interview instead the _one_ lone _inaccurate_ witness who
claimed the garment bag balloon was 75 feet in size so they
could beat this strawman to death as proof of the worthlessness
of eyewitnesses. They declared the _nutball_ witness the
so-called "principal witness" and stonewalled any interviewing
of the credible witnesses who made the report in the first
place. They referenced this screwball witness again and again
(CR pp. 18, 19, 64, 73, 395, 396) while ignoring the hundreds of
_accurate_ witness data points compiled on IFO cases that could
be used as scientific controls - as I've pointed out repeatedly
on UFO UpDates, where I calculate an approximate 97%-98% witness
accuracy rate based on 344 data points. See:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/apr/m11-030.shtml

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/apr/m13-017.shtml

After admitting that it was not a good UFO case at all but a
"marginal case" (crackpot), Condon himself made this his number
one IFO case and lied through his teeth about it, claiming that
"some 30 persons reported UFOs, including spacecraft with
flashing lights, fantastic maneuverability, and even with
occupants presumed to be from outer space. Two days later it was
more modestly reported that two high school boys had launched a
polyethylene hot-air balloon." (CR p. 18)

But in the actual case investigation (CR pp. 395-6) and
summaries (CR pp. 64, 73) there isn't a shred of any evidence at
all that this was even reported as a "UFO" nor are any of the
witnesses quoted saying it was a "spacecraft" - with or without
"flashing lights" - or that "occupants" from "outer space" were
seen or anything else similar. Nothing at all about any
"fantastic maneuverability" - only that the balloon-like object
would "drift," that it had "drifting" motion, they were
"slow-moving lights" and were seen to "drift" over the nutball
witness' location. The Condon Committee debunkers grasped at any
straw to discredit UFOs and it can be seen in the outrageously
dishonest and despicable treatment of cases such as this which
were repeatedly cited over and over to disparage and discredit
eyewitness data in general.

Had the witnesses stupidly described this as a "spacecraft" with
alien "occupants" (plural!!!) you can be sure the Condon
Committee debunkers would have seized on it - especially if they
could have backed up their lying boss Condon by doing so. Condon
was forced to lie his head off to make this his chief exhibit of
a UFO and lay the framework for ridicule of witnesses in general
- slandering them as so stupid and incompetent as to think a
3-foot dry cleaner's bag was a 75-foot spacecraft from outer
space - even though no one had said that. Condon had to
fabricate these phony crackpot claims and put them in the mouths
of the supposed "30" idiot witnesses who never said any such
things.

The case "came to the attention of the Condon people" because it
happened in their backyard so to speak and everyone knew about
the Project and where to call.


 >Clear skies,

 >Bob Young


Clear answers,

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 11:11:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:40:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting

 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>As for Rogue River, I consider that a very interesting sighting
 >>indeed. I list it as NE/Gold Beach since the river is fairly
 >>long .. and have it at 124:23W - 42:27N which should be close.

Hi,

To me an important key to Rogue River is that the sighting was
duplicated in extensive detail (virtually the same UFO - it was
even dirty in the same places!) in a sighting from Luton,
England ten  years later.

When this case came to my attention the witness did not know
about Rogue River and was stunned when I later showed him the
Blue Book report. There is little doubt he seemed to have drawn
what the witnesses at Rogue River reported.

I actually wrote an article on the very close comparison between
these two cases - which is easily the strongest match I have
ever seen to the repeat sighting of the exact same UFO (and one
with various unusual associated features that make a match by
coincidence rather unlikely). Yet these were allegedly witnessed
in two different locations at different times and on different
continents.

My report on this was I think the last article that I wrote for
FSR magazine titled 'In search of a UFO stereotype'. Its in
Volume 28 No 4 (l983) - if you want to check out why the
comparisons intrigued me and are so remarkable.

More recently, I noticed the photos of the Silverbug
experimental project from the l950s in International UFO
Reporter and the similarity struck me. I wondered if a prototype
had flown from bases in both the US and UK between l947 and
l957. In addition there is a 'crashed saucer' report from Fort
Riley Kansas in the l960s that describes (although here less
clearly) what resembles the same object - causing me to wonder
if these are all part of one trail of experimental aircraft
projects.

But take a look at FSR and let me know what you think.

I am personally as sure as I can be that this UK witness was
telling the truth. He went to extraordinary lengths to properly
document this incident without any reward and I certainly think
he is reporting what he saw. And what he saw appears to be
pretty well exactly what was described over Rogue River.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

               Florida Today's Billy Cox On Disclosure Project

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:59:24 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:42:50 -0400
Subject: Florida Today's Billy Cox On Disclosure Project


Billy Cox of Florida Today, is in my opinion the most
knowledgeable journalist around about UFOs and has over the
years done many in-depth articles. I have just received his
article from FLORIDA TODAY, May 20, about the Disclosure Press
Conference. Best I have seen. Take a look at it at

http://www.floridatoday.com/news/people/stories/2001/may/peo052001c.htm


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:03:36 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:44:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall


 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

 >>How should I know why Corso would lie? I am a physicist not
 >>a psychiatrist. I have no idea why an evil soul kidnapped
 >>and murdered a 5 year old girl in Alberta early in May. It
 >>sure happened.

 >>Maybe Corso wanted to convince his family and the world that
 >>he was a major hero single handedly saving the world. Maybe
 >>we was just beginning senility. Maybe he wanted to get the
 >>last laugh compared to those like JE Hoover who scorned him
 >>....Who cares?

 >I think the motivation for the "factual misstatements" is an
 >important thing. I think we _should_ care, although you are
 >probably right and most _don't_ care. But the man had to have a
 >reason for lying.

 >I don't know what his reason was, but I believe there is a
 >reason that he did what he did. Corso was not stupid. He had to
 >know that there were going to be people checking every detail of
 >the information in his book. He had to know there would be
 >questions, and that any non-factual data he tried to pass off as
 >factual would be discovered, and it would reflect unfavorably on
 >him in the long run.

 >The man was a Lt. Colonel... does the attaining of that rank not
 >foster some degree of honor in a person? I've never been in the
 >military so I don't know. Perhaps some of the former military
 >list members can answer that one for me.

 >It just doesn't make any sense that the man would lie without a
 >very good reason. And, in my opinion, whatever motivated him to
 >lie is something that we _should_ care about.


Bobbie,

Have you ever heard of megalomania? Corso seems to be a prime
candidate for that desriptive label.


Dick Hall







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                 Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 11:25:09 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:46:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman


 >From: Ed Gehrman<egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:24:42 -0700

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Friedman

 >>Just what difference does it make what Phil Corso Jr. believes?

 >I was only answering Bob's assertion that Phil Jr. only believed
 >10% of what his father had written. I contacted him and he
 >stated that this was a misunderstanding and he backs his father
 >100%. I'm just reporting what he said. Other than that, his only
 >contribution is to verify that his father was a major player,
 >and he believes that his father seeded alien technology into the
 >US business community.

 >>Since there is no classified information in the book, and no
 >>backup for the claims, how could the government forbid
 >>publication?

 >Maybe they checked on Col. Corso and found out that he was
 >ligitimate They may even have thought about trying to stop
 >publication. But then they probably asked a PR firm to assess
 >the book's viability and the PR folks told them not to worry.
 >They'll all think it's BS anway. Let it die a quiet death.

 >>As I understand, it the corrections weren't noted
 >>until after the book was published. I have one list by a full
 >>Colonel (also a PhD) of more than 90 factual misstatements.

 >Why don't you post this? It sounds interesting. Or, send it to
 >me privately. I'd be interested in looking at it.


I was sent the list privately. Obviously the 90+ misstatements
are of no interest to you since you are so convinced, for
whatever reason, that 'Corso The Great' saved the world

You certainly snipped what I said in a very selective way.... so
I will cut heavily here since I am sure the List is tired of
this nonsense.

<snip>

 >>Of course he refused... the film
 >>isn't genuine and he knew there was no legitimate cameraman.
 >>Jack Barnett was the first to film Elvis, was quite legtimate,
 >>but was _not_ in the military and died before 1970. Ray didn't
 >>buy the film from him until the early 1990s.

 >No Stan. You're wrong. Ray purchased the film from the
 >cameraman. It was real film. Who the cameraman was is of no
 >importance. The only thing that's important is looking at the
 >footage and seeing if we can solve the mystery of what actually
 >happened in New Mexico in 47. As for Col. Corso I stand on
 >Mike's VSA.

Ray's story is that he bought the film from the cameraman who
first filmed Elvis back in the 1950s and then, after selling
that footage,  mentioned the autopsy stuff which Ray eventually
bought. The cameraman was in the military and was supposedly
flown to Roswell even though Ray (later) says the cameraman took
his first pictures near Socorro in June, not near Roswell in
July, 1947. No explanation for why he was flown to Roswell maybe
170 miles away when there are other airfields much closer.

Now, listen carefully Ed. The first man to film Elvis was
Professional Cinematographer Jack Barnett (see "Elvis  From A to
Z"). The film was sold to Ray in the 1990s by a lawyer named
Randle in Cleveland.  . I spoke with him. I checked on Barnett.
He was quite legitimate. I even have a picture of him with
President Truman. But Barnett, who was also named by Ray as the
photographer, died in the 1960s.I obtained his obit.He was never
in the Military. So Ray's story is a LIE.. There are many other
lies. You can of course believe what you please , but let's not
try to palm it off as factual when it isn't.

When Kevin Randle  and I agree about the footage and about  Lt.
Colonel Corso, you can be reasonably sure  what we have
concluded is true.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                    Re: Rogue River Sighting - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:44:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:48:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Salvaille


 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:00:28 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


<snip>

 >>>I tried to pull in the relevant page of yours again, but
 >>again I got a 404 error:

 >>404 Error - File Not Found
 >>The page or file you are looking for
 >>http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue is not here.
 >>Possible Reasons:
 >>You may have spelled the URL incorrectly.
 >>This site may have been removed due to a violation
 >>of yadda yadda or moved to a different server.

 >>I tried http://brumac.8k.com, and that came in fine again.
 >>"Rogue" was easily located, but when I clicked on that, I got
 >>the very same 404-error. I also experimented with
 >>/ogueriver.html and variants.

 >Using Netscape I typed in:

 >http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/RogueRiver.html

 >and got there in a second (or so!).

<snip>

Larry, Bruce

Instead:

http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/

Now, you get the listing of the directory.

Parent Directory    2001-MAY-15 21:32:20      -
RRFIG0.gif          2001-MAY-15 21:34:21    16k
RRFig1.gif          2001-MAY-15 21:34:21    23k
RRFig2.gif          2001-MAY-15 21:34:21     9k
RRFig3.gif          2001-MAY-15 21:34:21   129k
RRFig4.gif          2001-MAY-15 21:34:45    17k
Rogue River.html    2001-MAY-15 21:34:21    43k

Then click on:

Rogue River.html

The problem stems from the _space_ between Rogue and River.html
that cuts the reference in half in mailing software.

In Explorer, the following will do the job

http://brumac.8k.com/Rogue/Rogue%20River.html

Spaces should be avoided at all cost in naming concentions on
the Internet.

BTW, Bruce, great work.

I wouldn't be so quick to reject Venus as an explanation for
this sighting though.

I know it doesn't fit the facts, but who cares?

God save us from any dreadful true UFO.


Regards








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                         Re: The Legend of the Dropa

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:53:27 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:51:05 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa


 >From: Gary Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:28:26 +0100

 >>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Aubeck

<snip>

 >>Erich Von Daniken (be not quick with a reflexive sneer...)
 >>wrote in "Gods From Outer Space (1970 pp96-98)" the
 >>following regarding the Dropa...

<snip>


 >Hi Alfred,

 >Thanks for your feedback.

 >Now, I don't want to burst your bubble but I found a curious
 >datum in my archives, and then again during my web search. You
 >can take a look at where it appears on the Net if you want at:

http://www.violations.dabsol.co.uk/weird/weirdpart3.htm

<snip>

 >There's even a snappy photo of Erich von Darnitman himself
 >which you can copy, print and paste to your fridge door.

<snip>

 >Chris Aubeck

 >Hi Alfred, Chris and List,

 >Alfred, Chris may be correct here.

<snip>

 >On 2 September 2000, I politely emailed Erich von Daniken to
 >try and obtain a clearer picture of his claims about the Dropa
 >and to see if photographs of the alleged stones and hieroglyphs
 >(in broad sense of term) were or could be obtained? Alas, Mr.
 >von Daniken was not forthcoming with a reply, so perhaps we
 >should exercise a bit more diligence in respect of this story.
 >Or else, permit those with better facts to stand forth..!

 >Best Regards

 >Gary Anthony

Hi Gary, list members,...

Years ago I sent von Dniken a letter telling him about a
fantastic theory I'd developed to explain the decreasing
life-spans we find in the Old Testament. I told him in the
letter that I was _sure_ that aliens from space (those who made
mankind) had deliberately injected some kind of age-decreasing
drug into our bloodstreams in order to get us to reproduce more
quickly. Shorter lives, I said, meant more generations in a
shorter period of time...so the aliens' hybridization project
would be completed sooner.

He replied after 6 months with a letter full of exclamation
marks saying he was sure I was _totally_ correct, and that he
shared my theory and that evolutionary scientists would _not_
prove us wrong. He saw that we were thinking along very similar
lines and it was obvious he was impressed by my research. He
also enclosed a free German edition of Ancient Skies in which I
supposed he had written about our brilliant hypothesis in detail
(I couldn't and still can't read German, unfortunately).

Anyway, I was so happy with my real EvD letter that I stuck it
on the wall next to my Spiderman poster and started saving up
for the paperback edition of his latest book. (You know, I was
only 13 and my parents refused to give me money for weird stuff
like UFO books.)

A year or so later I received another letter from the von
Dniken desk, but I don't remember what it was about. But there
was another signed copy of Ancient Skies in it, in German, for
me.

Well, I just thought I'd share that with you.

Chris Aubeck

P.S. Years later I finally unsubscribed to the English version
of Ancient Skies after a polite argument with Gene Philips, its
founder and EvD's legal bodyguard. I wanted him to publish an
article of mine which criticised Z. Sitchin's 3rd Earth
Chronicles book. "This is not a scientific organization," he
wrote. "We will not publish anything critical of our members'
work as the skeptics do enough of that already." I thought this
conflicted so much with the statement that "this is a tax-free,
not-for-profit educational and scientific organization" printed
on every document or letter they sent to people that I felt more
than a bit annoyed with the whole lot of them.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                        Re: Serious Research - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:10:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:52:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Clark


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000


 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>>>If the Coyne case was a meteor, then why are there not
 >>>>meteor reports for that date and time from Ohio and adjoining
 >>>>states? As you should know (if you don't), fireball meteors
 >>>>virtually always are reported over a very wide geographical
 >>>>area.

 >>>>As a matter of fact, only a tiny proportion of fireball
 >>>>meteors are _reported_ at all. They can be visible over a wide
 >>>>area, if the sky is clear or dark and they are sufficiently
 >>>>bright and, but whether anyone happens to be looking at that
 >>>>hour is another matter.

 >>>Good God! It didn't look like a meteor, it didn't act like a
 >>>meteor.

 >>Who says? Sound like one to me, and I've seen a bundle of them,
 >>including brilliant green bolides.

 >You've seen a fireball approach a helicopter, hover above it
 >long enough for ground witnesses to see it approach, stop their
 >car, and get out and watch as the two hovered near each other?
 >Wow! I envy you!

 >>We're talking about descriptions of unexpected things seen in
 >>seconds. The fireball looks a lot different at it's peak
 >>intensity and when it is nearly burned out, it can look like it
 >>is "zooming away."

 >And I repeat; show me any objective evidence that it was a
 >fireball. The ones that are not seen are clearly irrelvant. This
 >one (if that's what it was) clearly was seen and should have
 >been seen over a wide area. I am betting that you can't find an
 >American Meteor Society (or other meteor observer net) fireball
 >report for that date, time, location. I'll even accept a
 >newspaper report of a fireball at that time and place. That
 >would give me pause and cause me to reconsider your hypothesis.

You're being much too kind, Dick. Nothing will square the circle
that transforms the Coyne UFO into a meteor, however much Bob
distorts the testimony and rejects the part of it that destroys
whatever slight case he has. The object did not look like and
did not act remotely like a meteor, and it was visible far too
long, and nothing is going to change that. It would be easier to
believe the whole story is a hoax from beginning to end, though
there's no evidence of that, Klass's smarmy innuendoes
notwithstanding.

Jennie Zeidman, who conducted the only real investigation of the
case (and who, as anybody who knows her will attest, is nobody's
fool), went to some considerable trouble to investigate the
meteor hypothesis. She consulted extensively with an astronomer
at Ohio State University (William M. Protheroe) as well as Allen
Hynek. She writes, "Their conclusion is that the generally
accepted time for longest meteor head visibility, under the most
favorable conditions, would be of the order of 30 to 40 seconds.
Thus the appearance of the object, the nature of its motion, and
the length of time it remained visible all provide grave
difficulties for a meteor hypothesis as an explanation for the
reported events."

As for Phil Klass, whom Bob cites as if Holy Writ (not for the
first time), Zeidman makes these telling observations:

"Within a few days of its occurrence, Philip Klass, an aviation
journalist, propounded that the object was merely 'a bolide of
the Orionid meteor shower.' Klass maintains that position to
this day. Repeatedly asked to submit a second-by-second
time-line analysis based on his own research, Klass has
steadfastly declined to do so. Klass and Coyne have never met.
Klass has never visited the site of the encounter. His only
contact with the nine visual and two sound-and-light witnesses
has consisted of two phone calls to Coyne and a talk-show chat
and supper with [helicopter crew member Sgt. John] Healey. When
I asked Klass why he had never talked to the witnesses, he wrote
that he 'didn't have to talk to the witnesses: Woodward and
Bernstein never talked to Nixon.'"

For a full account of Zeidman's investigationi of this
remarkable and still unexplained encounter, see Chapter 29 of
Peter A. Sturrock's The UFO Enigma.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                         Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:52:07 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:54:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:18:38 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:21:19 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young


 >These Gallup Polls have a margin of error of 3 points. By the
 >early 90's the number had gotten up to 14 percent, but has since
 >dropped.

 >Do you have a recent Gallup Poll question on UFO witnesses which
 >is significantly different?


Hey Bob,

This is kind of futile, I mean it's what sceptics enjoy doing
best coming up with polls and stats, just so they can show the
wider world, that there is a group out there that they lovingly
belong to.

So, I think I can accept now bob, that you do belong to a group
of people who you feel happy with. I understand nature
biologists call it the pack mentality.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:54:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:56:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:25:44 -0500

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Listfolk may be interested in hearing who the Einstein was who
 >thought up the Venus explanation. It was an associate of Allen
 >Hynek, a systems engineer named William T. Powers, who worked at
 >Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory. Powers suggested
 >it in a phone conversation with Blue Book's Maj. Quintanilla.
 >Later, after Powers had seen the evidence in its totality, he
 >retracted the explanation and apologized for his role in
 >suggesting it to the Air Force.

Jerry:

He was a fool.

 >"Apparently I found out considerably more about this event than
 >the Air Force investigator did," Powers wrote Spaur in May 1966,
 >"because I cannot agree with the evaluation publicly released a
 >few days after the sighting [that Spaur et al. had initially
 >seen a satellite, then Venus]... I now understand that you and
 >other witnesses did notice Venus and the Moon, and saw the
 >object in motion relative to them, as well as being able to see
 >a shape. At no time, however, did I suppose that the earlier
 >part of the sighting [explained as an Echo satellite] involved
 >anything other than an [unidentified] airborne object."

What about the later chase of Venus? If Spaur noticed Venus and
the UFO earlier, why did he chase the planet into Pennsylvania?
It doesn't add up, Jerry, unless you are saying that Spaur _at
no time_ chased Venus.

 >Amusingly, when Quintanilla explained his theory about the case
 >to Spaur's boss, Portage County Sheriff Ross Dustman, Dustman
 >(in his words) "laughed out loud." Seems the only reasonable
 >response.

A perfect ufological Tale of Two Cities. Jerry things the
Sherrif was laughing at Quintanilla, but I suspect he was
guffawing at Spaur. And so it goes on.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:58:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:52:07 -0500

<snip>

 >Likewise, the official conclusions about Roswell were questioned
 >not just by some ufologists (while, of course, others embraced
 >it with unbecoming enthusiasm) but by outsiders. I remember
 >watching the live June 24, 1997, press conference on CNN when
 >the Air Force announced its Latest Final Solution to the Roswell
 >Problem - namely that witnesses had miraculously mistaken (in
 >1947 nonexistent) crash-test dummies with humanoid bodies. A
 >number of reporters laughed out loud, and the theory was treated
 >with a fair amount of ridicule outside ufology before dropping
 >into the memory hole. Which, of course, the Air Force knew it
 >would, because society implicitly believes that since UFOs don't
 >exist, even stupid explanations, preferably not closely
 >examined, are better than none at all.

 >And _you_ talk about cynicism.

 >Jerry Clark


Jerry,

Thanks for your comments.

Here's an alternative reading of the Air Force's comments. I'm
sure there are probably others.

The Air Force essentially took the Tales of Kaufmann, Glen
Dennis and some others at face value. They then said, since we
didn't recover any alien bodies at Roswell, how might the idea
that we did have arisen? Here's one possibility, and, yes, we
realize that there is a time discrepancy, but maybe the
witnesses misremembered the timing of events.

Of course, there was an alternative. The Air Force could have
said, "Well, to tell the truth, we think these people are, uh
liars, or, if you prefer, simply exaggerators."

Would you have preferred that approach to the one they took?

Probably not, because, hey, those alien bodies gotta be
somewhere, right?

BTW, wasn't there also a GAO investigation of Roswell? Remember
reading _anything_ favorable about its conclusions in the UFO
press?

Actually, it doesn't have to be favorable or approving, merely
objective would suffice.

Just curious.

Just checked the Index of the 2nd ed. of your UFO Encyclopedia
and didn't see either General Accounting Office or Steven Schiff
listed.

Anyway, I look forward to ufology's reviews of Pflock's Roswell:
Incon- venient Facts and the Will to Believe.

Should make for fun summer reading! (It'll be too hot around
here by then to do much of anything else anyway!)


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:13:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:00:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Incidentally, I had direct communications from a scientist of
 >>the Kuwait scientific organization (ca't recall its name right
 >>now). Iraqui aircraft landing in a Kuwait oil field?

 >>Hell, two years later they captured the lot in a few hours.

 >Bob,

 >The meaning and logic of this statement totally elude me. How
 >reasonable is it that an Iraqui aircraft landed in a Kuwaiti oil
 >field (just as the electricity "coincidentally" failed) and then
 >took off again without being recognized for what it was?

Are the identities of the eyewitnesses known?

Let's see, now, can we rank the possible causes of an incident
such as this? Which is more likely?

1. A spook aircraft from Iraq, two years before a war, perhaps
testing out Kuwaiti response (or whether their radar even
worked) when power was down;

2. An aircraft from Kuwait, checking out the reason for an
electrical blackout, or;

3. A flying saucer from another world filled with little grey
ETs sucking the electicity.

Another UFOlogical Tale of Two Cities.

Regarding the Coyne helo incident UFO being a meteor, I had
said,

 >>Sound[s] like one to me, and I've seen a bundle of them,
 >>including brilliant green bolides.

 >You've seen a fireball approach a helicopter, hover above it
 >long enough for ground witnesses to see it approach, stop their
 >car, and get out and watch as the two hovered near each other?
 >Wow! I envy you!

 >These ground "witnesses" surfaced three years later after
 >>newspaper publicity describing the sighting. According to Phil
 >>Klass, they placed the UFO miles away from the helo.

 >"According to Phil Klass?" You ignore Jennie Zeidman's
 >meticulous investigation and reconstruction of the case ("A
 >helicopter-UFO Encounter Over Ohio," Center for UFO Studies,
 >1979, 122 pgs.) and accept Klass's erroneous remarks based on
 >armchair debunking? Shame on you! What does it matter that the
 >witnesses were not found immediately? The UFO and helicopter
 >were placed in close proximity, not "miles away."

 >Unlike Klass, Jennie actually interviewed the witnesses for two
 >hours at the site.

Unlike Ziedman, who spoke to these people three years later,
Klass cited an appearance by Coyne on national television (the
Dick Cavitt Show) describing the incident as lasting less than a
minute, a couple weeks after the incident.

She reconstructs a timeline of what they saw, first from their
moving car and then after they stopped and got out. They saw two
sets of lighted objects converge. The second steady-lighted
object approached what was now recognizable as a helicopter and
stopped over it.

A reconstructed "time-line" three years later which directly
conflincts with the testimony of the witnesses immediately after
and then shortly later can only be an excercise in fantasy.

Dick earlier stated,

 >>>It had visible structure and precisely positioned body lights.

 >>So does a fragmenting fireball. All fragements are "precisely
 >>positioned". Since the object was an unkown, what could this
 >>claim possibly mean?

<snip>

 >>As a bright meteor high in the atmosphere (not really near as
 >>assumed) moves away and disappears, it can appear to change
 >>direction. Last November during the Leonids I was lucky enough
 >>to catch a so called "Earth grazer", just as the radiant was
 >>rising in the east. The thing zoomed across the sky and looked
 >>like the afterburner of a jet as it disappeared in the distance.

 >But it didn't stop and hover and illuminate the terrain beneath
 >it, presumably.

Yes, it did illuminate the ground. I have seen three fireballs
which cast noticeable, moving shadows on the ground.

 >And I repeat; show me any objective evidence that it was a
 >fireball. The ones that are not seen are clearly irrelvant.

I agree. However, your claim was that because it wasn't reported
by anyone else, it couldn't exist.

 >This one (if that's what it was) clearly was seen and should have
 >been seen over a wide area. I am betting that you can't find an
 >American Meteor Society (or other meteor observer net) fireball
 >report for that date, time, location.

I'd be willing to make a bet, too, if I already knew what the
cards were going to show.

Since you didn't cite Philip Klass for any of your cases, I
wonder if you read the chapters of his books on his
investigation. It is, to date, the principal skeptical
investigation of this incident. If you had, you would know that
he had checked with the AMS and they had not received any
reports for this time and place, and I'm sure that you would
have cited him.

There are now several organizations which collect reports like
this, but in 1973 the AMS and the Smithsonian Astrophysical
Observatory's Scientific Events Network were about it, and
scattered observers for the Association of Lunar & Planetary
Observers. Still, even now, few fireballs are actually reported,
whether they are visible or not.

 >I'll even accept a newspaper report of a fireball at that time and
 >place. That would give me pause and cause me to reconsider
 >your hypothesis.

A safe bet for you, in any case.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                   Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:14:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:03:43 -0400
Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa - Lehmberg


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:26:05 -0500


 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
 >>From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: The Legend of the Dropa

 ><snip>

 >>Hi Alfred,

 >>Thanks for your feedback.

 >>Now, I don't want to burst your bubble but I found a curious
 >>datum in my archives, and then again during my web search. You
 >>can take a look at where it appears on the Net if you want at:

 >>http://www.violations.dabsol.co.uk/weird/weirdpart3.htm

Dear Alfred, Hoss (is this a new lister?), EBK, Eric and Gerald
Dean ... oh, and bListers too.

I have been accused of making light of subjects on this list, of
scurrilous (God Lemme, I love tht word - wherre'd yous find it?)
of scurrilous uh... I don't know what that means so I may be
guilty. However, to get to my points, I shall make an
announcement first. During my last abduction by the space
people, you know who you are, I was told a marvelous prediction.
This prediction is quite unique, as hereto four, these cwazy
prediction had to do with the health (or lack of same) of our
planet an' stuff.

So here is the prediction... I shall be the Intergender
Wrestling Champeen of the entire Universe. This portion of it
anyway. Isn't this exciting?

And now for the point to point commentary on your toast posty, Al.
Ahem.

 >...And thanks for _your_ feedback, but don't worry about _my_
 >bubble, hoss, it EXPECTS a bursting - I count on it. It's a
 >potential elevation. Finding out you're wrong about something
 >can be a step up. Be that as it may, many of your points do more
 >to deepen the mystery than they do to validate your rational
 >skepticism. With a constantly receding (and evolving)estimation
 >of civilization's genesis by the propeller heads, and much of
 >that information contrary to the party line established view of
 >things - I am at once irritated and amused at the fearful
 >scurryings of the skepti-bunky scurrilous clutching imagined
 >safe realities to their withered chests. Just _one_ of these
 >things has to be true, and I've a sneaking suspicion that it's
 >not all bullshit. We're not likely to hear forthcoming
 >admissions in any case, but I'll keep my ears to the ground and
 >my eyes to the sky regardless - just in case something slips
 >through - you best do the same. Some of that stuff seems to slip
 >through via the good Swiss...

Uh, sorry - But I cannot understand most of that Al, so I cannot
comment. Although there is one thing about bursting a buebo that
I can comment on. I had one them in a previous life. I died.
Onwards...

 >Lastly, most of it _is_ fake, Chris, I understand that, but some
 >of it is not. I think _you_ understand _that_. In as much as
 >I've had one career blow up in my face (and I think maybe the
 >second one on it's heels) for the completely justified passion
 >that this reality precipitates, I've nothing further to lose in
 >a quest of some kind of philosophical satisfaction regarding
 >this... teasing and ubiquitous anomalous. I might as well devote
 >my life to it. Moreover, if I have to choose between say, Gerald
 >Posner (an obfuscator for powerful sociopaths) and Erich Von
 >Daniken, I'm going to have to go with the Swiss every time. He
 >has an honest, more expansive, axe to grind. Besides - it may
 >be that Von Daniken has told the truth and a half to make up for
 >the mainstream skeptibunkies telling half the truth.

Well, here is a kernal of a thingie about which I _can_ comment.
I used to wear Dr. Posner shoes. My mommy wanted me to have them
because I had fallen arches and they were good for that. It is a
known fact, even by scurrilous skeptiboogers, that Fallen Arches
Are A Sign Of The Abduction Experience!

Also, I was in Switzerland once. And I just got back from Paris.
Although I was not gay. And I visited the Bayerishehoff in
Munich and got pork-faced in a wonderful rathscallion,
rathskeller, whatever they got down there. And the loin was
fanastic. That night, after schnopps, Cherman beer and more
schnoppes (and some gluvine the nice people told me was out of
season but made me anyway) I saw the real truth about life, God,
the Unicerse and Everything. I was wearing my leather and tin
foil hat that night so I presumably did not get abducted. I
wouldn't have remembered anyway.

And last, I did get some new ideas for Cherman Gripple. This was
a good trip.

 ><snip>


 >>Then he contacted the Soviet writer who had
 >>given the story to Von Daniken to check whether he had given Von
 >>Daniken an accurate account. However the response was not as
 >>expected; far from giving Von Daniken the story, Aleksandr
 >>Kazantsev stated that Von Daniken had given it to him."

 >Forgetting for a moment the Chinese lack of response (no
 >information is not conclusive information, it is justtt no
 >information, and strangely puzzling for that), it might well
 >have been very convenient for Kazantsev to remember the story
 >the way he remembered it... and it's no stretch to think so, I
 >believe. My society compels me to look behind what its
 >institutions hold up as the truth. I didn't start out this way,
 >but many times bitten, many times shy. Unlike you, apparently, I
 >just can't be assured of the quality of many citations.
 >Especially the comforting ones. I can only think about what's to
 >be gained by maintaining the obvious conspiracy of reflexive and
 >sometimes completely irrational denial...

I am sorry but I must disagree with you Al. Kalishnikoff made
good fire arms. What the hell are you talkin about?

Now, I shall rest. I am testing a new Cherman Gripple and I seem
to be illuninating. Halumitating. Hallucy mating. Something.


Hic,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                    Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:51:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:06:14 -0400
Subject: Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Sparks


FYI in re Roswell's reported high-strength balsa-like materials
(and Corso's abject failure to pick up on this). Doesn't prove
it was ET but it is interesting.

Source: Nature

Science Update Tuesday 22 May 2001

http://www.nature.com/nsu/010524/010524-8.html

technology: Nothing to it

PHILIP BALL

It's not much more than smoke. Yet the new material developed at
the University of Oklahoma is no lightweight when it comes to
strength (1). An inch-square block weighs barely more than a
gram, making it only half as dense as balsa wood. But you need a
hammer to break it.

Better still this material is made from cellulose, the main
component of wood and paper and the most abundant substance in
the living world.

The new material is a type of aerogel — a porous solid
made up of chains of microscopic particles. Bing Fung and
colleagues combine an existing technique for making aerogels
with a method for toughening paper. The result, which is
ten-times stronger than existing cellulose aerogels, will
delight engineers and designers in search of ultra-light
materials.

Aerogels have been around since the 1930s. Their tenuous, candy
floss-like networks are so riddled with pores that they are
hardly there at all — aerogels can be up to 99% air. They
can be made from all manner of materials: silica (the main
constituent of sand and quartz), metals or carbon.

Aerogels have many potential uses. If all the air is sucked out
of them, they become a kind of 'solid vacuum' that is a good
heat insulator and can support weight — ideal for
vacuum-filled double-glazed windows. They could also provide
sound insulation.

Most explorations of such applications have so far used silica
aerogels, made by the 'sol-gel' technique. Here particles form a
skeletal network in a liquid solvent, creating a gel. The liquid
is then removed to leave the dry solid. Unfortunately, silica
aerogels tend to be brittle: some collapse at the touch of a
finger.

Aerogels made from organic materials such as cellulose can be
tougher. Previously, some of the best of these were made from
resin-like mixtures, creating a highly porous and lightweight
form of bakelite.

The Oklahoma researchers make their aerogels from cellulose
acetate, a polymer derived from wood pulp. They toughen the
materials using a chemical process similar to the one that
strengthens paper. An analogous process makes solid rubber from
the fluid, sticky natural rubber gum.

1. Tan, C., Fung, B. M., Newman, J. K. & Vu, C. Organic aerogels
with very high impact strength. Advanced Materials 13,
644–646 (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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                NASA Press Conference On New Mars Face Image

From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:22:11 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:08:37 -0400
Subject: NASA Press Conference On New Mars Face Image


I emailed the web master of JPL today asking about where I could
find a new image or images allegedly taken of the Face on Mars
on April 8, 2001 according to a letter sent by Edward Weiler,
NASA Associate Adminstrator for Space Sciences, to Peter
Gersten, lawyer for FACETS, a citizens' action group.

The JPL webmaster replied that a press conference has been scheduled
about this subject tomorrow (5/24/01).

For the exchange of letters between Gersten and NASA, see:

http://www.infosourceresearch.com/

Gersten's original "demand letter," Weiler's reply, and
Gersten's follow-up letter to Weiler are posted there.

I can't, of course, guarantee that there will be any press
conference or that there are any new Mars Face images, but
Weiler's letter is most definititely authentic. Gersten and
David Jinks, the founder of FACETS, have been working on this
project for a year.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:11:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000

<snip>

 >All I was saying is that (at least lately) you have been coming
 >across as skeptical to the point of debunking, and not willing
 >even to suggest that there is anything important left to
 >investigate. If this is merely your cynicism about the state of
 >ufology talking, many of us agree with that. The term "ufology"
 >is a pretentious joke in the first place. However, the UFO data
 >is another question (or issue) altogether. There is no logical
 >relationship between the silliness of ufology and the potential
 >importance and significance of the UFO data.


Dick,

I will admit that I have become...jaded in my middle age. Woe is
me!

Having seen the way some of the incoming "data" is handled, it
doesn't require a great leap of the imagination to suspect that
the data from the past may have been similarly mishandled.

But I'll try to lessen the sweep of my broom. Or is that
bandwidth?

<snip>

 >Screw "ufology."

Not until more young women get involved! :]

<snip>

 >Funny you should ask that of an erstwhile chess player (now in
 >extreme rusty mode), but I still do have that faith cited above
 >that a real, thorough scientific investigation (not these
 >jury-rigged or superficial substitutes) could change the
 >picture. I like Brad Spark's image of ten fulltime Jim McDonald
 >equivalents going after the subject. But then, I knew Jim and
 >you didn't.


It's not too late to take up the honorable game of Go. As a
former chess player myself, Go puts Chess in the dust.

Bless Jim, but here's the proverbial rub. Like most of ufology,
99.9% of his data was in anecdotal form. There is little that a
scientific investigation of, say, the Father Gill case can do
after the fact, except to say, "interesting, if true."

This will be a cliche to you, but it is the same problem that
plagues ball lightning studies. The latter is now begrudged some
sort of quasi- existence by mainstream science, but there is
little that can be said, proclaimed, or predicted _about the
phenomenon itself_ because of its transient nature. The only way
to effectively investigate it would be to establish a network of
sensors in the hope of capturing future events. That ain't gonna
happen with ball lightning -- and it ain't gonna happen with
UFOs, neither.

Now, let me backtrack. Actually, the world grows more
electronically wired every day in ways that should let us
monitor UFO activity as it happens -- assuming the numbers some
ufologists promulgate. Weather radar, commercial "spy"
satellites, and so on. Theoretically, UFO sightings should be
greatly on the increase as a consequence. There are two other
consequences that need considering in this vein, too. One, as
the world continues to be increasingly surveilled in all sorts
of spectra, electromagnetic, visual, etc., the less the power
any imagined cover up entity could conceivably wield. Two,
science should be arguably logging this data on their own, w/o
any reference to present day ufology or UFO wars of the past.
There is no particular indication that this is happening.

Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
science would just come over here and take an honest look at
what we've got, things would change. This totally ignores the
fact that science _should_ be detecting this stuff on its own,
coming to us, and asking, "wow, look what we got here! Got
anything like that in your database?" Again, _if_ UFO events
were as common and profligate as much of ufology insists they
are.

That science isn't, is some sort of an answer in itself, whether
one agrees with it or not. Most ufologists don't -- and won't.

Just as most ufologists will never sanction a Congressional or
scientific investigation of the UFO data -- _unless it arrives
at the conclusions they've already reached_.

Jerry Clark is probably already logging on, but this isn't a
condemnation of

ufology and ufologists per se. It's a simple sociological
statement. The same could be said of advocates of abortion and
opponents to same. No matter how the scientists weigh in on the
issue, the debate would continue unabated.

I do not want to be seen as a debunker of the UFO data, such as
it is, else I wouldn't be here. At the same time, to the extent
that I have a public presence, I am not about to make or endorse
statements ("alien bodies were recovered at Roswell... the
Secretary General of the UN has been abducted") that I cannot in
good conscience support with cold, hard scientific evidence.


Pawn to K4?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                     Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:13:24 -0400
Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Tonnies


 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:24:49 EDT
 >Subject: New Karl Pflock Book
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >This is a shameless plug, but I do think most if not all of you
 >genuinely will find my new book to be of interest and a
 >worthwhile contribution to ufology, regardless of your views on
 >Roswell. As my publisher's jacket copy puts it, "The story is
 >not what you think it is, no matter what you believe happened -
 >or didn't":

<snip>

As a Roswell agnostic who's read all of the skeptical Roswell
literature as well as the salient "pro" Roswell books, I
sometimes wish an author would have the guts to admit we just
don't know for sure what exactly happened.


=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) 816-561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112
http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:55:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:53:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:15:33 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >>My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
 >>important but that there seems to be some confusion about
 >>whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken. I
 >>know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
 >>confusion over this? I don't know.

 >Well, I feel that I am entitled to be a general, so I'll just
 >adopt that rank from here on in. Nope. This doesn't wash.

All I'm saying is that Col. Corso said he was a full Col.
(retired) His son says he was a full Col.

I'm trying to get more information on this.

I can't answer why this confusion exists but it's hard for me to
understand why Col. Corso would feel the need to inflate his
rank when he knew he would be under scrutiny. I'm confused, too;
but I know that Col Corso is who he says he is so it's hard for
me to make such a big deal out of something that might have
another explanation. What you, Greg, Robert and Bob, and now
Richard and Jerry don't understand is Col. Corso's history and
the subtle meanderings of his life. I don't know everything
either, but the way you're approaching this evdence is just
another reminder that deep in the heart and soul of every ufo
researcher is a pelican's shadow.

 >Nope, they've lied on multiple occasions. Santilli said that the
 >tent footage was a hoax.

Santilli had nothing to do with the tent footage. He dropped it
as soon as he realized that there were problems. Have you viewed
the tent footage? Ray said it was a hoax played on him; not that
he perpetrated it.

 >He changed the cameraman's statement
 >after it was pointed out that it was not an American "voice,"

I'm not aware of this. Could you provide proof. I've heard these
rumors before but haven't seen any evidence. I would appreciate
knowing more about this. You can write me off line.

 >had those crazy security classifications that he showed until
 >those with the knowledge said such classifications never
 >existed... and so on. Not one lie but multiple lies.

The above statement is not correct. The security classifications
were part of the hoaxed tent footage and Ray may have alluded to
them but he didn't understand their importance. I believe the
classification information was taken from the box or film label
that was with the film Ray sent to the "tent" hoaxers. He had
asked the hoaxers to see what they could get from some of the
film that was severely damaged. The classifications were not
necessarily bogus and I've written to both you and Stan about
this fact. Do you remember? It had to do with "restricted" as a
classification.

 >Neither Santilli nor Corso have anything to contribute. I have
 >looked at all of this carefully. Don't you think I would want it
 >to be true because it would verify my statements that something
 >extraterrestrial crashed at Roswell. However, I have examined
 >these statements carefully and when I find problems, I'm going
 >to point them out. I'm not going to allow these people to insult
 >my intelligence by climbing on their bandwagons.

I certainly don't agree with that. You've not answered the M.
Dennis article, nor the striking resemblance between the Ft
Worth Roswell photos and the debris in the AA. You have not
ordered the AA CDs to take a look, for yourself, at our
evidence.  You haven't rebutted the Corso VSA. You have
investigated Col. Corso's background, but only superficially.
You haven't said one word about the subject of this thread:
Corso's FBI Files, revisited. You and the ther Corso/AA
debunkers have the same attitude: the AA and Corso can't be
true; therefore it must not be true. You're all going to look
pretty foolish sometime down the line.

 >More to the point, Corso has no proof that they are true. We're
 >just supposed to believe them because he said so.

That was his big mistake. He thought because of his former
status, and the letter from Strom that folks would believe him.
He was wrong. But we do have scientific proof that he wasn't
being deceptive, Mike's VSA. VSA is a scientific tool and all
investigators should have one in their tool kit. I wouldn't
think of using witness testimony if they refused a VSA. But if
they pass, then we have a very good notion they they're telling
the truth. Mike didn't know that Dennis was a known liar. He
listened to the tape and then told me that his testimony could
not be trusted.

 >McCarthy implies this, but then he has no proof. He claims that
 >both Schmitt and I admitted that we had fabricated the missing
 >nurse story, but McCarthy is mistaken. I never said any such a
 >thing. Should we reject Schmitt? Yes. But not just because
 >McCarthy said so. Should we reject me, because McCarthy said so?
 >No. Not without proof.

Should we reject all that Corso says simply because you and
others have called him a liar? He has passed a VSA on these
questions. Explain that before you start supposing this and
that. You all need to take another look at the Corso
information.

Yes his stories sound improbable; his whole life is improbable,
but when you look closely, you find that it's true.

 >>You have no proof that this didn't happen. It seems far fetched
 >>but we're dealing with aliens. Anything is possible, even time
 >>travel.

 >More to the point, you have no proof that it did.

I do have evidence, the VSA. He's telling the truth.
You should listen.

 >Sorry, but it is true. I've read Birnes on the subject. Have you
 >ad Pflock, who talked to the senator's staff?

I wouldn't believe anything that Pflock says. Ask him if
he'll do an interview with me that I can tape and put through VSA.


 >Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
 >occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
 >point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
 >The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
 >quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
 >by him, me maybe more so than others.

I wasn't aware of that. Sorry! I'm glad we have that straight.
It's good to have these frank discussions.

So how many digits did the Roswell alien have? What's you're
latest thinking on this?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                Cydonian Imperative: 05-24-01 NASA to Address

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:00:52 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 05-24-01 NASA to Address


The Cydonian Imperative
5-23-01

NASA to Address "Face" at Press Conference 5-24-01
by Mac Tonnies

NASA is going to hold an official press conference on "Face"
tomorrow, following the legal efforts of FACETS. NASA's letter
to FACETS (Formal Action Committee for Extraterrestrial Studies)
included the fascinating revelation that additional, apparently
unreleased photos of the Face have been taken that may help
settle the issue of geology vs. artificiality (see above).

I personally suspect that NASA will use the conference to
officially retract this statement as part of an embarrassed
"damage control" effort, or else take another stab at "scotching
this thing for good."

The conference will be the first time NASA has publicly
addressed the Face since 1976, when it erroneously attributed it
to a "trick of lighting." Let's hope we're not in for a
high-tech replay.

The Cydonian Imperative:

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                          Re: New Karl Pflock Book

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:13:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:02:54 -0400
Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book



 >From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:24:49 EDT
 >Subject: New Karl Pflock Book
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Dear colleagues

 >This is a shameless plug, but I do think most if not all of you
 >genuinely will find my new book to be of interest and a
 >worthwhile contribution to ufology, regardless of your views on
 >Roswell. As my publisher's jacket copy puts it, "The story is
 >not what you think it is, no matter what you believe happened -
 >or didn't":

 >Roswell: Inconvenient Facts And The Will To Believe
 >By Karl Pflock

 >With a foreword by bestselling science and science-fiction
 >writer Dr. Jerry Pournelle Hardcover, 331 pp., photos,
 >appendicies, and index; $25 (Prometheus Books)

 >Official publication date is June 1, but many bookstores already
 >have it on their shelves. If your favorite bookseller doesn't
 >yet have it in stock, they can order it for you or you can order
 >it yourself right now -

 >- From ufology's own Arcturus Books (Bob Girard) at
 >rgirard@aol.com or 561-398-0796 (9 a.m. - 6 p.m. EDT, M-F), who
 >is stocking it and whom I urge everyone in ufology to support;
 >or

 >- Online from Amazon.com, BarnesandNoble.com, other online
 >booksellers; or

 >- Directly from the publisher via their 24-hour, toll-free order
 >number, 1-800-421-0351.

 >Books make great gifts (hint, hint).

Dear Carl and bListers, EBK and all;

I shall make you a deal, an offer you can't refuse, OK?

I'll not only buy yours, but I'll let you show me yours.
On condition that:

1) You let me show you mine
2) You buy mine
3) And for all your fiends and friends.

OK?

Uh, Carl - Karl, sorry, please, is there any possibility that
you can maybe alter the moniker just slightly? I mean, I walk
into a bookseller and say, "Hey there, uh, you guys got that new
Flocken Book yet? Uh, never mind.

Phlock. I know how to spell it but saying it is a lot more
difficult.

Gesundt ain't no winner, and needer is Mortellaro. Which by the
by, means "Long Life" in Sicily. There is an evergreen tree
there which is indiginous to Sicily, from which my name stems.

Now Gesundt, that's an entirely different matter.

In Yiddish, it means "Health."

So, we got us a healthy, long lived tree in me.

With great respect and in complete Lilliput type
fun, I remain,

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt, aka, Mortellaro.
Intergender Wrestling Champeen of the entire
world. Dylan erven writ a song about me.

"Here comes the story of the Evergreen,
The man the authorities came to bleem,
for sumpthin that he never done.

Put in a prison cell but _one_ time,
he coulda been, the Intergender
wrestling champeen of the world-uh."

Thank you.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:48:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:06:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro


 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hi Dick, Bob, All,

 >'Opinion' ahead! Run for the hills!!! ;) Not all of this is
 >being directed at you personally Bob. It's more of a general
 >comment than 'Bob Young' specific. Although it does apply to you
 >in many respects.

 ><snip>

 >Dick Hall wrote:

 >>>Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >>>where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >>>CUFOS-NICAP files.

 >Bob responded:

 >>Got any saucers there?

 >UFOs represent a profound event in the history of mankind. There
 >is enough 'hard' evidence for the existence of a 'real'
 >phenomenon (whatever its origin) to convince even the hardest
 >skeptic that there is a genuine mystery here. There are enough
 >FOIA released -government documents- alone (aside from the
 >aforementioned Bluebook and CUFOs files, etc.) to put to rest
 >any doubts as to the existence of 'anomalous' craft(s) (genuine
 >unknowns) operating in our collective air space.

 >Only someone who has _unchangeably_ made up their mind about the
 >nature of UFOs could question its validity as a real phenom and
 >continually demand "proof."

 >The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one thing,
 >but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive
 >(like having 500 lbs of lead in your pants while trying to climb
 >Mt. Everest) to continue to indulge the ones who refuse to
 >accept all the available evidence.

I agree with everything said up until that last paragraph, and
frankly, had to jump in for an opine or two. OK, OK, I lied.
Maybe three.

John Velez wrote:

 >but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive

My dos centavos. Which these days is not worth much (the pennies
not the opinion, depending on who's reading of course) ...

This forum is for everyone. I get really stressed out and
frustratingly angered whenever I read some of the small minded
(my opinion) points of view by some. But it is their right to
say it. Here or anywhere else. Most important of all _here_
because this list is not just for believers, it is not for
research either, strictly speaking. Writing. Without the
skeptics, non believers, etc., we are merrly a club of people
who know our truth. Hey, we don't even know what the hell this
stuff is all about. We cannot prove to someone else, that what
we've experienced really happened to us. So the person who has
not one dot of belief, who is giving Venus and Swamp Gas, not to
mention Pelicans and such as reasons, has a right to state his
or her opinion.

Otherwise, it would be better if Errol excluded anyone from this
list who was not a researcher, or one seeking information and
truth about what the hell happened to us.

 >If the available data is not enough to convince you that there
 >is a real phenomenon involving craft of unknown origin and
 >manufacture, then fine, just step aside while the rest try to
 >move the discussion and the investigation of the subject another
 >square or two on the board. At this stage in the proceedings,
 >continually taking the time to debate (indulge) the "show me a
 >cigarette lighter from a UFO" crowd is slowing any progress or
 >inroads that can be made toward expanding our understanding of
 >the phenomenon.

Also some truth in the philosophy, but not in the request to
"step aside." There is always the option of hitting that
"delete" button. Me personally??!? I prefer to hear every crumb
of information from every source, so that I can garner
something, even if only agida.

 >I don't know about anybody else on the List but I came here to
 >get information about UFOs and to participate in any discussions
 >about their purpose or origin. Not to try to 'convince' anybody
 >about the reality of it. We _waste_ almost half of the
 >discussion time (bandwidth) of this List watching a seemingly
 >endless debate where 'one side' is perpetually trying to
 >convince the 'other side' that the phenomenon is real. It just
 >seems to me that our collective time would be better spent
 >trying to understand the events taking place rather than
 >debating/educating those who remain on square one and still
 >question its reality. When they 'catch up' and arrive at the
 >point where they realize that we are dealing with a genuine
 >mystery, they may then be able to contribute something of value
 >to the ongoing discussion on this _UFO_ List.

 >IMHO if you honestly believe that there is 'nothing' to all of
 >this even after having studied all the available evidence, then
 >maybe taking up valuable bandwidth on a "UFO List" isn't the
 >most productive way to spend your time and energy. Frankly I
 >don't care if Bob or anybody else "believes" or not. I'm here
 >to learn what I can about the UFO phenomenon, not to "educate"
 >or "convince" those who have made prejudgments about it.

 >Need to actually see a UFO before you believe? That's cool. Wait
 >till you see one, or until they land in your backyard. Then you
 >can join us and help us to figure out just what the hell is
 >going on. Asking us to explain or justify our position or
 >beliefs day after day, week after week, is a stone cold drag.

 >Dick Hall (or Jerry Clark, or Stan Freidman etc. etc.) does not
 >have to incessantly justify or explain their position or beliefs
 >to all comers on the List. That's why they write books. It is a
 >testament to how patient, genuinely nice, and accommodating
 >these folks are when they take the time to answer (usually for
 >the umpteenth time) the same old questions regarding the
 >evidence for UFOs. The "proof" is there for all to see and study
 >for themselves. I'd rather use this time to pick Dick Hall's
 >brain and learn from his long experience than to watch him have
 >to explain/justify his position three times a week to every
 >"show me" guy that rolls down the pike.

 >If you just "don't get it" then you just "don't get it." Fine,
 >please step off and let us all move ahead to a more productive
 >and intelligent discussion of the subject. Because you have
 >already made up your mind that the phenom doesn't exist doesn't
 >mean that we _all_ have to remain eternally stuck there. Can we
 >puleeeze move past the "show me" stage? I'm starting to feel
 >like I'm stuck at a dance party where the *record needle is
 >stuck in the same groove.

The mainstream science guys make me wanna puke sometimes. But
the reality is that their training, education and culture,
requires proof. And more often than not, for them to simply say,
"Well, it may be possible, but there is no hard evidence...."
etc., etc. will get their asses in a sling... Then, their
colleagues would be on them like white on rice.

Sorry. But there is more to be learned from our enemies and
those who naysay us than not. And this ain't a closed list, just
for me or you or anyone. If these people, the naysayers, really
did believe that there is nothing to this phenom, then I trust
they would not be here. Has it ever occured that they too, are
seeking information from _US_? They too want to learn something?
And who better to learn it from than us. We who have experienced
the crap for a lifetime.

It did to me.

Otherwise, I ain't got nuttin to debate.

Jimmy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                        Re: Serious Research - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:36:12 +1200
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:18:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sawers


 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:47:08 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez


 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hi Dick, Bob, All,

 >'Opinion' ahead! Run for the hills!!! ;) Not all of this is
 >being directed at you personally Bob. It's more of a general
 >comment than 'Bob Young' specific. Although it does apply to you
 >in many respects.

<snip>

Dick Hall wrote:

 >>Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >>where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >>CUFOS-NICAP files.

 >>Bob responded:

 >>Got any saucers there?

 >UFOs represent a profound event in the history of mankind.
 >There is enough 'hard' evidence for the existence of a 'real'
 >phenomenon (whatever its origin) to convince even the hardest
 >skeptic that there is a genuine mystery here. There are enough
 >FOIA released -government documents- alone (aside from the
 >aforementioned Bluebook and CUFOs files, etc.) to put to rest
 >any doubts as to the existence of 'anomalous' craft(s) (genuine
 >unknowns) operating in our collective air space.

 >Only someone who has _unchangeably_ made up their mind about the
 >nature of UFOs could question its validity as a real phenom and
 >continually demand "proof."

 >The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one thing,
 >but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive

<sadly snipped>

Excellent post John.

I've been thinking this way for the last ten years or so, up
till about 1988+ the majority of books coming out on the subject
of UFOs were rehashes of old sightings. We have to move on. Most
ppl, even the great unwashed believe there is something out
there/here even!

We're not going anywhere and this will continue if we keep
getting bogged down with trying to convince the unconvincable.

Maybe that's why they're here?

I can't see that it's a hobby for them, doesn't seem too
enjoyable to me. Scouring UFO lists to find things they can
disagree with?

All it seems to do is divert us from the real reason we're here
which John has so eloquently stated in the above.


Thanks again John,

William







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:21:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Hi Bob,

 >I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >was in such an outfit.

 >Jan Aldrich

Hi Jan,

As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
or ever existed.

That said I would observe that over the many years of cold war
research I conducted I never actually _saw_ any evidence that
their was a Codeword Sat program called Corona actually in fact
existed (other then leaks and stories told by govt officials)
until the program was declassified and the documents were
released.

Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
called basic information.

As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
released at the national archives that their was no highly
classified side to it.

If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:50:11 +1200
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:26:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers


 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:43:10 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder


 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:55:04 -0300
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited


G'day Bobbie, Stan & List

<snip>

 >>How should I know why Corso would lie? I am a physicist not
 >>a psychiatrist. I have no idea why an evil soul kidnapped
 >>and murdered a 5 year old girl in Alberta early in May. It
 >>sure happened.

 >>Maybe Corso wanted to convince his family and the world that
 >>he was a major hero single handedly saving the world. Maybe
 >>we was just beginning senility. Maybe he wanted to get the
 >>last laugh compared to those like JE Hoover who scorned him
 >>....Who cares?

 >I think the motivation for the "factual misstatements" is an
 >important thing. I think we _should_ care, although you are
 >probably right and most _don't_ care. But the man had to have a
 >reason for lying.

 >I don't know what his reason was, but I believe there is a
 >reason that he did what he did. Corso was not stupid. He had to
 >know that there were going to be people checking every detail of
 >the information in his book. He had to know there would be
 >questions, and that any non-factual data he tried to pass off as
 >factual would be discovered, and it would reflect unfavorably on
 >him in the long run.

 >The man was a Lt. Colonel... does the attaining of that rank not
 >foster some degree of honor in a person? I've never been in the
 >military so I don't know. Perhaps some of the former military
 >list members can answer that one for me.

 >It just doesn't make any sense that the man would lie without a
 >very good reason. And, in my opinion, whatever motivated him to
 >lie is something that we _should_ care about.

 >My two cents


Quite right Bobbie. The man was a Col/Lt.Col. for Gods sake. You
don't get to that rank and even to be a "pain in the ass" to the
FBI without the knowhow and necessary qualifications to actually
be a pain in the ass.

Most of his credentials are true, so why would he make up such
preposterous lies... enough to defame his family for eons to
come, (Oh thats the bloke, <LOL>, that claimed to do <LOL>, the
seeding of <LOL> of alien technology haha <LOL>.....)

Corso had honour and was a patriot. I'm a Kiwi and proud of it!

I think Corso was an American and he was proud of _that_! A man
of his stature that stood in the background as a 'spook',
without any recognition, was going to soil his and his families
name hereafter with blatant lies!?

Nah. I don't buy it.

The same way you were "had" over not recognizing the
significance of the AA. You got mixed up in the politics and
business aspirations rather than what was _really_ going on. You
fell into the debunkers trap, scared that your valuable reps
would be tarnashed.

I think it's you Dennis/Greg/Stan/Robert that have been "had".


William (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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:16:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:35:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:03:36 -0000
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall

 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

<snip>

 >Bobbie,

 >Have you ever heard of megalomania? Corso seems to be a prime
 >candidate for that desriptive label.

 >Dick Hall

ROFL! That's a good word for it! And I think you're probably
right in connecting it to Corso. It's just a shame, in my
opinion, that the man apparently thought so little of himself
and had so little concern for his kids that he felt the need to
leave them such a legacy.

I guess I just don't understand the apparent need for attention
or whatever it is that motivates people like Corso or a certain
hot-tubber that shall remain nameless or Dennis "I ate Burger
King Whoppers with a Zeti-Reticulan alien" Bossack or What's His
Name with the dead alien in his freezer.

People like that is why I gave up listening to Art Bell years
ago, however.

Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:17:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:41:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:36:19 -0500


 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:43:22 -0400

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

  <snip>

 >>>Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
 >>>occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
 >>>point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
 >>>The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
 >>>quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
 >>>by him, me maybe more so than others.

 >>I want to add my own voice here, to say that Kevin most
 >>certainly has done what he says. I was astonished when I read Ed
 >>Gehrman's statement.

 >>In this sorry field of ufology, where everyone, believers and
 >>skeptics, acts as if they're always right, Kevin is one of the
 >>few people who'll admit when he's wrong.

 >>Greg

   Dennis, List, all -

 >Greg,

 >I agree! Now, all he has to do is disavow Roswell in its
 >entirety. <BG!>

 >Glenn Dennis is now down the drain, so maybe we can begin next
 >with Frank Kaufmann, followed by Jim Ragsdale and Frankie Rowe.

I thought it was very clear that Jim Ragsdale was down the drain
as well. He shifted the scene of his encounter, changed the name
of the woman after she reappeared alive and well, talked of
fifteen golden helmets on the bodies of all those dead aliens, a
jewel encrusted throne in the space craft and big eyed aliens of
the abduction mold.

Kaufmann might have been his own worst enemy, but he did offer
some documentation and there was some corroboration for details
that he supplied. Unfortunately, that documentation was not
provided to those of us who would have checked it out, given our
limited resources, so, while I have seen it, it does nothing to
validate his story.

Frankie Rowe is a very nice lady.

 >Who first turned them up and how credible do they remain? And
 >then there are those nuns and that anonymous archeologist.

Well, unfortunately, you have to blame the nuns on Don Schmitt,
but I take full blame for the anonymous archaeologist. I believe
that both Tom Carey and I have identified him and talked to him
separately. Dr. George Agogino talked to him as well and
confirmed that the man told him what he had told me, which, of
course, doesn't make it true.

 >Not to mention a couple of death bed confessions to the effect that,
 >"cough, cough, it's all true, every single bit of it...
 >(croak)," never mind that Randle himself has already admitted
 >that _all_ of it couldn't conceivably have been true, viz. his
 >own retraction of the Dennis  testimony.

 >As for that there Roswell Encyclopedia, might ask Randle whether
 >he ever interviewed Lorenzo Kent Kimball, and if not, why not?

Sure did interview him, and he provided some of the data that
surrounded the tale of Jesse B. Johnson.

 >Robert Todd could have given him the following URL, as he did
 >everyone on this list:

 >http://www.inconnect.com/~lorenzok/roswell.html

 >But maybe Randle has never heard of Todd, either.

Heard of Todd and have communicated with him, until his letters
became nasty and I saw no need to continue.

 >Maybe we should ask, instead, how he came up with the name of
 >the individual who was reported to have conducted the alien
 >autopsies, while managing to overlook Kimball and Col. Comstock,
 >both of whom outranked the individual Randle/Schmitt "chose" as
 >their autopser, and both of whom denied that any alien cadavers
 >passed through Roswell while they were on duty.

Unfortunately Dr. Johnson was mentioned as the "autopser" by
Glenn Dennis. Don Schmitt looked Johnson up in the Compendium of
Medical Specialties and learned that he had been trained as a
pathologist. It wasn't until Schmitt self-destructed that I
looked Dr. Johnson up and learned that he took his training
_after_ the he left the Army and therefore wouldn't have been
the right man. But then, I explained much of this in The Roswell
Encyclopedia in the segments about Dr. Johnson and Don Schmitt.

 >IMHO, Randle has got a lot to answer for re Roswell, and Glenn
 >Dennis ain't the half of it. He's only the beginning. And that
 >goes for Friedman, too, who can't quite rise to the occasion and
 >admit, "yes, Gerald Anderson took me and my co-author, Don
 >Berliner, for suckers." As in we were too willing to believe any
 >and everything that came our way.

You might remember that it was Don Schmitt and I who exposed the
majority of the Gerald Anderson tale. You might also remember
that I was the first to interview him and in the search for
corroboration of his tale learned that he wasn't exactly who he
said he was, starting with his tales of being a Navy SEAL and
continuing through his forged telephone bill.

You might also remember that it was I who exposed J. Bond
Johnson's ever-changing tale of what happened in General Ramey's
office and I suggested that the Barney Barnett tale does not fit
into the story in any way. Much of the negative material about
the Roswell case, such as the tale of Jim Ragsdale and Glenn
Dennis was exposed through work that I did.

And yes, I take responsibility for reporting on these tales in
the first place.

I was the first to talk to Ragsdale, though Schmitt got the
first long interview with him. I talked to Glenn Dennis briefly
before Friedman, but then cancelled the longer, scheduled
interview after Friedman asked that we not talk to Dennis and
that he would share with us everything that he got from Dennis
in return. Friedman thought that another interview, within a
week or two of his long one would spook Dennis. Now, I look back
and see that Dennis, always seemingly reluctant to talk was
always persuaded to talk.

I have tried to report on all aspects of the Roswell case,
telling everything that I knew that had relevance to
understanding the case so that those who hadn't had the
opportunity to speak with the witnesses, who hadn't had a chance
to review the evidence would be able to do so. That is why, in
The Roswell Encyclopedia, I included the long section by Kent
Jeffrey explaining his beliefs on Roswell without commentary in
that segment.

And, while you might not like my opinions on the Roswell case,
I don't like some of the things I have seen done to the
witnesses, many of them honest people.  Others have deserved
everything they have gotten.

For those who wish to learn something more about the Roswell
case, I suggest The Roswell Encyclopedia. For those looking for
the other side of the coin, why not pick up Karl Pflock's new
book - sorry Karl, I didn't write the name down, but I'm sure
you won't mind supplying it. I would also suggest looking at
Phil Klass' book about Roswell, though I disagree with much of
what he says.

And now I will return to working on a book about the sinking of
Titanic, which is more fun because, at the very least, I know
the ship existed and that it did sink.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                           Did You Make The List?

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 12:50:00 -0400
Subject: Did You Make The List?


I get the weirdest email sometimes! This came today. I don't
even know the guy who sent this to me. But since he gives
permission to pass it on, I thought I would do just that. This
is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. If you need
a good laugh, check this out!

Bobbie

___________________________________________

Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 03:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: B upton <ufobuzz@yahoo.com>
Subject: Baktar
To: jilain@ebicom.net

The Good, The Bad & The Ugly in Ufology

A New Version Featuring the Insights of Baktar Summary May 24,
2001

copyright (c) Friends of Baktar 2001

"Everyone is fair and right to have their own reactions and
their own emotions and their own opinions. This is the point of
the list - to help people become more discerning and more
trusting of their own emotions, their own reality, and not so
much leaning on somebody else's reality."  - Baktar

The opinions and information that follow are those of a
channeled extraterrestrial named Baktar. They are his
perceptions as filtered through the perceptions of a human
channel, and as such, they may or may not be accurate. It is
the privilege and the responsibility of each individual to make
their own determination about what they choose to believe.


The Good

Promotes the truth

DAVID ADAIR He is a genius who did and who knows the remarkable
things he claims. He will blow the lid off things when he
thinks he can get away with it. He has been threatened a great
deal.

GILLIAN ANDERSON Unlike her Agent Scully character in X-Files,
she is not only a believer but also a contactee. She will be
using regression and other means to remember her contacts.

GEORGE C. ANDREWS His information is highly accurate,
especially on the subject of technology. He is an unknowing
channel, and the spirituality in his books is very good.

DARRYL ANKA His channeling of the Essassanian Bashar is
extremely accurate.

NEIL ARMSTRONG While on the Moon the Apollo 11 astronauts
encountered Greys who telepathically communicated, "Why are you
here? This is our place. We don't want you here. You need to
leave."

STEPHEN BASSETT He is well intended and sincere in wanting to
get the truth out, but in the future he may yield to the
temptation of offers that will be made to him with strings
attached.

PAUL BENNEWITZ His story is true except for the part about his
being an outsider, which was created to protect the identity of
himself and the ETs he befriended when he worked at the Dulce
base.

AL BIELEK (soul name Edward Cameron) Edward Cameron was so
concerned about what happened in the Philadelphia Experiment
that he spirit-possessed the body of Al Bielek in order to warn
the public.

BRANTON Most of what he personally represents as truth in his
Dulce Wars book is accurate.

BOB BROWN This director of the International UFO Congress wants
to let people discern for themselves what information to
believe. He wants to put out truth but he doesn't want to impose
it.

ALEXANDRA BRUCE This author of The Philadelphia Experiment
Murder is an extremely talented researcher who has the
creativity to put together pictures of how things work while at
the same time using logic very well so as not to mistake
creative speculation for reality.

LYN BUCHANAN He still has connections with the government but he
does not enjoy working for them. He is a man of strong integrity
who has a good potential for the future.

DOLORES CANNON This regressionist historian is a very
open-minded researcher who, however, can adopt new ideas too
quickly and can be overconfident in her beliefs.

JOHN CARPENTER He is concerned about ETs doing things to people
against their will.

JIMMY CARTER The UFO he saw was piloted by positive ETs (Sirians
and Pleiadians) who wanted him to see them. As president he was
told not to pursue the UFO subject, and that any revelations
would only panic people. To have told the public anything would
have jeopardized his personal safety.

BARRY CHAMISH He is an excellent researcher who, however, is
immersed in fear-based thinking, especially regarding Biblical
prophecy.

CONNIE CHUNG She has the strength, the courage, the research
skills and the position to potentially be the leading person in
mainstream news to investigate and speak the truth about UFOs
and ETs.

JEROME CLARK He puts out accurate information, although he may
tell stories in a grandiose way.

RUSSELL VERNONCLARK The material this university professor
analyzed and found to contain isotope ratios implying
extraterrestrial origin came from a UFO crash in the southeast
corner of New Mexico.

ARTHUR C. CLARKE He is not in the loop. He is open-minded only
about things he has scientific evidence for. He believes what
those in the know tell him and doesn't believe in conspiracies.

ALEX COLLIER He is accurate in describing his Andromedan
contact. The Andromedan message that humanity is a model of
individual sovereignty and freedom for other races is accurate.

PHILIP CORSO He told as much as he safely could. He had a sense
that some ETs were his friends but also he believed we needed a
strong military defense against ETs.

MARC DAVENPORT Information about him is being protected on a
spiritual level, including the reason positive beings
manipulated him and Leah Haley to marry.

PETER DAVENPORT He withholds National UFO Reporting Center
reports involving the military. He is a skeptic especially about
physical ET contact, which unknowingly he has had himself.

VANCE DAVIS The military was quite surprised that he and the
others of the Gulf Breeze Six were able to get the secret
information they did through a ouija board.

ROBERT DEAN The NATO document he saw identifying four types of
ETs was real. Bad guys tried to use him to release
disinformation through but he was too discerning, and they gave
up.

JIM DILETTOSO He has mostly put out truth, but he biases his
findings according to what clients want to hear. If the money is
good enough, he will change his mind.

ANN DRUFFEL This author of How to Defend Yourself Against Alien
Abduction wants others to resist abductions because of the pain
of her own abductions, which she is unaware of.

DON ECKER As the editor of UFO Magazine, his wariness of
humanoid beings in general is a strength that will serve the
public well, although there is also some fear with him.

ALBERT EINSTEIN The power elite sponsored his education and
harnessed his genius for their purposes. He had contacts with
positive ETs (Sirians and Pleiadians).

JOHN FOSTER He is still suffering effects from the reptilian
conditioning program he was subjected to, and has a great deal
of anger at the ETs for repeatedly interfering with his life
then making him forget.

URI GELLER His contacts with a Federation-connected ET group
called The Nine and his PK and other paranormal abilities are
real, although he sometimes resorts to trickery when his PK
ability fails him.

BRUCE GOLDBERG He is pursuing truth but he is inclined to state
assumptions and theories as fact, and is unwilling to later
correct anything he has said.

JOHN GREENEWALD, JR. He knows a lot about the power elite but
has accepted some of their ideas and is being fooled by their
disinformation, including selectively-released and altered and
faked documents.

GUS GRISSOM He and astronauts Ed White and Roger Chaffee were
murdered by a fire intentionally set in their command module to
stop them from telling the public about contact they had with
Greys.

TED GUNDERSON He is reporting accurately on what he has learned
about the international sex slave trade. He has strong anger
against anyone who he perceives as being a sexual deviant, so
occasionally he has "jumped on" someone without proper cause.

LEAH HALEY She has had mostly military-ET collaborative
abductions but also some power elite abductions, the latter
being the source of her anger. (Also see Marc Davenport)

BRIAN HALL This host of the Conspiracy Con is an open-minded and
very flexible truth seeker who wants to create a forum where
people will be excited about finding truth and then will put
that truth out into the world.

BILL HAMILTON His loving nature blinds him to liberties with the
truth taken by his wife Pamela.

PAMELA HAMILTON She is having the ET contacts she claims but she
elaborates on the truth a bit.

PRINCE HANS-ADAM He is partly in the loop but also knows he has
been told some lies and wants to know the truth. For this
purpose he assisted Michael Hesemann's research.

JAMES HARDER He regrets abusing hypnosis on behalf of the
military. Presently he is putting out truth but the government
may try to use him again

MICHAEL HESEMANN He is a well-balanced researcher who is
open-minded but likes to see proof.

BETTY AND BARNEY HILL They experienced a military-ET
collaborative abduction. Greys did the abduction while military
personnel observed.

RICHARD C. HOAGLAND He is a funnel for information from both
good and bad guys, and sometimes is fooled by disinformation. He
is drawn in especially by stories involving fascinating
technology. His heart attack was induced by black-ops
intelligence people who wanted to sabotage his campaign to
preserve the Miami Circle, a sacred site similar to Stonehenge.

LYSSA ROYAL HOLT Her channeling of the Pleiadian Sasha and other
beings is highly accurate.

LEN HOROWITZ He is an excellent researcher who is to be heeded.
He is impassioned about truth and angry at scientist colleagues
who have experimented with viruses and bacteria in irresponsible
ways.

DOC HOWARD He did travel back to 1947 to stop an experiment
using nuclear energy for time travel that had caused a
cataclysmic explosion in the environs of Chicago in the time
line he came from.

POPE JOHN PAUL II He loves the Church, he loves the people, and
he wants peace. He knows that ET contact is occurring and is
chronicled in the Old Testament. He says nothing about this
because he fears it would panic the public and because there are
things he is not allowed to say. The next pope will be a member
of the Illluminati, which will gain complete control of the
churches.

MIESHA JOHNSTON She has had abductions by the power elite. She
has much fear of the government.

JOHN F. KENNEDY He was a true "man of the people" who got wise
to the power elite and became a threat to their power. He knew
about the government's involvement with ETs and wanted to tell
the public.

GINA LAKE Her channeling of Theodore, from the Federation, is
highly accurate.

BARBARA LAMB She is love and joy oriented. She wants to help
people stop being victims.

BOB LAZAR It is difficult to obtain information about him
psychically due to an electronic implant placed in him likely by
the government. Apparently he is a good guy.

ROGER LEIR As a surgeon who removes implants from abductees, he
is a man of science who likes proof. He is concerned that some
ETs seem to treat humans like lab animals.

MELINDA LESLIE She has undergone very many abductions of the
military-ET collaborative type, and she is being watched very
closely.

GEORGE LUCAS He had ET contacts of a positive nature, especially
from the Federation, that were mostly astral, in dreamtime, but
also on occasion physical, and these inspired Star Wars.

WILLIAM LYNE He is as he represents himself to be. His research
is good though narrowly focused. He is very angry at the
government he used to work for.

JOHN MACK This Harvard psychiatrist has good discernment and
good intuitive ability to sense truth. However, he tends to
believe that all ETs are good and to attribute all negative ET
activities to government.

BARBARA MARCINIAK The Pleiadians she channels are the lowest,
most physical level of the three levels of Pleiadians. Fear
about reptilians has affected her channeling.

JIM MARRS He is an excellent and objective researcher. However,
he attributes great power to New World Order conspiracy without
understanding the power of spirituality and positive ETs.

JORDAN MAXWELL His research is very good although sometimes he
"stretches" in making connections. Also his fear and anger play
into the hands of the power elite, who want to be feared and
looked up to.

BILLY MEIER He is genuine but there is much confusing of truth
in connection with his case.

EDGAR MITCHELL He is a truthful person by nature but is
withholding what he knows about NASA�s lies.

MARILYN MONROE She was killed by black-ops CIA when she
threatened to reveal UFO information that President and Robert
Kennedy had shared with her.

WILLIAM MOORE He was selected by Richard Doty as someone to leak
the MJ-12 documents through, but he pretended not to know who
gave them to him. Presently he is putting out truth. His current
research indicating that the holy scripture of the Mormon Church
was a fraud is accurate.

JIM MOSELEY Saucer Smear is his own creation, without any covert
involvement. He enjoys the gossip about ufologists and the
pointing out in fun how self-destructive their attacks on one
another can be.

PRESTON NICHOLS He believes what he says, but things are muddled
by mind control he was subjected to. Psychic access to him is
blocked by an electronic implant placed in him by the
government.

LEONARD NIMOY He is something of a walk-in with an ET (Sirian)
higher self like the Spock character.

CATHY O'BRIEN She was used in a government mind control program
and as part of the international sex slave trade. Many of her
memories are distorted but they are rooted in fact. Positive ET
contacts (tall Greys and Pleiadians) have given her the strength
to tell her story to the world.

ROBERT PERALA His ET contacts are real and he is pretty good at
discerning truth. However, there is a great deal of information
the ETs are giving him that he isn't putting together in a way
he can explain well.

MARK PHILLIPS He is helping Cathy O'Brien put out truth, but
because he is motivated by a protective feeling toward her, that
same feeling, if felt for a disinformer, could lead him to
promote disinformation.

JENNY RANDLES She has a psychic shield around her, apparently
self-created by a fear-based desire not to have anything happen
to her without her knowledge. Apparently she is putting out
truth.

DAN RATHER He knows about the government's use of technology
from crashed UFOs and he knows many other government secrets
that he keeps quiet about. He knows about President Kennedy,
Marilyn Monroe, Vince Foster and many others being murdered for
speaking or trying to speak the truth, and he doesn't want to
join them. He may begin telling the truth once it has come out
through others.

RONALD REAGAN Through an insider informant he learned too much
about the ET situation, so the power elite mind-controlled John
Hinkley, Jr. to assassinate him. The public statements he made
about how an ET threat could unite humanity were made for the
purpose of drawing more informants to him.

LAURANCE ROCKEFELLER His thinking about ETs is positive, but he
would like them to help him build a financial empire based on ET
technology. He is trying to get in the loop.

GENE RODDENBERRY He received guidance from seven groups of ETs
in creating Star Trek. He had physical contact with Sirians in
the desert who showed him technology aboard their UFO.

CARLA RUECKERT Her channeling of the Ra material was highly
accurate.

MARCIA SCHAFER This author of Confessions of an Intergalactic
Anthropologist is an ET (Sirian) soul who has never before been
human, and she has some ET genetics. Because of her ETness, she
is able to recognize ET aspects in others. Her channeling is
highly accurate. She is a very loving being.

PHIL SCHNEIDER He was murdered for speaking out. The Atlantean
and other ET technology and information he helped the government
recover from underground caverns is so important that positive
ETs have placed a psychic shield around the Akashic records
relating to these.

DERREL SIMS He is a victim of government abductions and mind
control that left him with fear and anger directed against ETs.

YVONNE SMITH She is genuine in wanting to help people and she
has a fairly balanced viewpoint about ETs. She wants to help
other abductees because she wants to protect herself from her
own abductions.

STEVEN SPIELBERG He has had many positive ET contacts including
with Greys and Praying Mantises.

WENDELLE STEVENS He is a very loving, giving and honest person.
Due to his loving nature, he gives the benefit of the doubt to
the contactees he interviews.

PAMELA STONEBROOKE She is demonstrating the possibility of
having a positive relationship with reptilians. However, she has
overly idealized the "merchant reptilians" she is involved with.

WHITLEY STRIEBER He is sincere and truthful. Archangel Michael
spirit-possessed an unknowing human to visit Strieber in the
middle of the night and give him information that went into his
book The Key.

MARSHALL V. SUMMERS His channeling is highly accurate though
oriented toward fear-based scenarios. The warning that some ETs
will try to manipulate us in order to acquire Earth's resources
is valid. NIKOLA TESLA He was an ET walk-in whose genius was
assisted by ET contacts with many groups. He was forced to work
for the government. His science contributed to HAARP and the
Montauk project.

DENNIS TITO The world's first paying space tourist was a threat
to NASA and they opposed his space flight because if he saw a
UFO he would become a highly credible witness to the existence
of UFOs.

ANDY THOMAS He is passionate about his message that people need
to stop taking things at face value and need to pay attention to
where conspiracies and disinformation may be operating.

KARLA TURNER She was the victim of power elite abductions that
simulated abductions involving ETs and instilled anger in her
against ETs and government. It was the anger that created the
cancer she died from.

GEORGE VAN TASSEL He was visited by several ET groups including
Pleiadians and Venusians. Much of his ET contact was through
channeling as facilitated by his walk-in higher self.

DON WALDROP This local MUFON director is genuine and is not
being tampered with by government. He judges people emotionally
rather than logically. He fears he may be an abductee.

ED WALTERS He was abducted by positive Greys. The
Christmas-tree-ornament-like UFOs he photographed were
Pleiadian. He did not like the attention he received and would
rather be out of ufology.

TRAVIS WALTON He was abducted by positive Greys assisted by
Nordics in a manner intended to bring the fact of ET abductions
to the attention of the public.

LARRY WARREN He is truthful but misinformed on some points. The
UFO that landed at Bentwaters was a hybrid-piloted military
craft that developed problems in flight and had to land at the
nearest base.

MEL WATERS His story about "Mel's Hole," a miles-deep hole with
paranormal properties that was confiscated from him by the
military is true. The hole leads to a cavern inhabited by
positive ETs.

KATHARINA WILSON This author of The Alien Jigsaw has a great
deal of integrity and a strong will. Positive ETs started
abducting her because negative ETs were abducting her, then the
government started abducting her because ETs were abducting her,
then the power elite started abducting her because the
government was abducting her.

MICHAEL WOLF This human-Altairan hybrid with degrees in
neurology, theoretical physics, computer intelligence,
international law, biogenetics and bioelectromagnetics was a
repentant member of the MJ-12 Special Studies Group and in
charge of its lead agency, the Alphacom Team. His book The
Catchers of Heaven is fact disguised as fiction. He contributed
his input to a friend who provided Richard Boylan with most of
the information for the original Good, Bad & Ugly list.

COMMANDER X He works in underground bases, including Dulce, and
is the commander of one of them. He works with ETs on a regular
basis. He wants to prepare the public for a possible war with
ETs.


The Ugly

(The Unreliable)

Compromises the truth, whether knowingly or unknowingly

Please note that our standards for placing people in the Good
category rather than the Ugly - meaning the Unreliable, meaning
a certain DEGREE of unreliability - are very high. A person may
be very well intended and doing much excellent work on behalf of
ufology, but if even a substantial minority of what they are
putting out as truth is mistaken or strongly distorted, we put
them in the Ugly category and thereby challenge them to do
better.

GEORGE ADAMSKI He was the original government plant, a "useful
fool" put before the public to find out how much they would
believe a person like this. He was manipulated to believe a lot
of what he said.

COLIN ANDREWS Without realizing it he has sold out to
accommodate his new Rockefeller elite group friends, and now
falsely portrays most crop circles as hoaxes.

WALT ANDRUS He does not realize how bad guys have used him and
MUFON for their purposes.

KENNETH ARNOLD He was the victim of government mind control in a
project to find out what the public reaction would be to a UFO
sighting.

ART BELL He wants to put out truth, but his greater interest is
in being a successful broadcaster doing an entertaining show. He
would rather avoid responsibility for deciding and declaring
what is true. He is independent-minded and controlling, and
doesn't let anyone tell him what guests to have on his show.

GRAHAM BIRDSALL There is a psychic shield preventing access to
information about him. His true status and potential are
unknown.

BILL BIRNES He wants to get truth out but is highly compromised
by pursuit of self-interest. He is fearful about ETs, and he
knows that scary stories sell well.

RICHARD BOYLAN He works very hard to put out truth and has been
threatened and persecuted by the government for this. The
military has placed a "soul catcher" implant in him that
interferes with his speaking about exciting new information (it
reacts to the neurochemistry of particular emotions). Once he
trusts someone, he is not able to admit he made a mistake. He
looks to ETs as saviors and won't acknowledge that they are as
varied as humans on a good/bad spectrum. He received information
from a friend of Michael Wolf and added some of his own to create
the original Good, Bad & Ugly list.

COURTNEY BROWN He was the victim of an experiment by the
government to find out how a remote viewer could be manipulated
to put out wrong information.

GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH He is partly in the loop and knows
about our ET technology. He is not one in control, but rather
one who had to go along to get along.

GEORGE W. BUSH He knows that the government is working with ETs
but he is not as much in the loop as his father. He doesn't like
ETs and would rather not have to deal with them.

PRUDENCE CALABRESE She doesn't differentiate between her vision
and her strong imagination. Her remote viewing is inaccurate.
There is ego, love of fame and showmanship, and control
involved.

CHRIS CARTER This creator of the X-Files television series is a
very creative, intelligent individual, but there is occasional
mind control going on with him, and some of his ideas are not
his own.

DICK CHENEY Asked if he had ever been briefed on UFOs, he
answered, "If I had been briefed on it, I'm sure it was probably
classified, and I couldn't talk about it." Yes, he is partly in
the loop.

BILL CLINTON He knows only a little bit about the government's
knowledge of ETs. He agrees with those maintaining the cover-up
that the public is better off not being informed.

ALEX CONSTANTINE This mind control researcher once worked for
the government (possibly the Navy) although not as a
disinformer, then he separated from them. His information is
only moderately accurate.

WILLIAM COOPER He had a UFO sighting that he was told to be
quiet about, which made him angry and prompted him to study
ufology, then he invented a dramatic story to make people listen
to his warning.

LICIA DAVIDSON She has had a couple of abductions by a couple of
ET groups, but her military harassment is mostly dreamed or
imagined.

ASHAYANA DEANE (Anna Hayes) Her filtering is very high for
several reasons, including that she is not comfortable with her
channeling contacts, some of whom are negative, and that she was
subjected to mind control debriefing as part of the Montauk
project. She injects a lot of drama into what she channels.
RICHARD DOTY As a member of the Aviary (an offshoot of MJ-12),
he believes the information he has been given to put out.

JOE FIRMAGE He has let his money go to his head. He is being
groomed to be a useful fool by the bigwigs he wants to rub
shoulders with and impress.

STANTON FRIEDMAN He wants to put out truth but became a victim
of bad guys who have funneled much disinformation through him
including about fellow ufologists.

JAMES GILLILAND He is having real encounters but he engages in
considerable imagination, fantasy and exaggeration. Beginning in
childhood he has been abducted by positive ETs (Pleiadians and
tall Greys). JOHN GLENN The government wants to make him a
useful fool for their controlled release of information to the
public, and toward this end they arranged for his recent
statement on the sitcom Frasier.

DAN GOLDIN He knows a minimal amount, such as that ETs exist,
that NASA is a front for the public, and that black technology
exists that NASA is deprived of. He is willing to play the game.

AL GORE He knows that the government is working with ETs but he
is not in the inner circle.

STEVEN GREER His ET contacts have all been positive, and he
wants ETs to be viewed as our helpers, but he goes overboard in
attributing anything negative that ETs do to government. Also he
harms truth by trying to force HIS truth on others.

DAVID HAMEL (Daniel Hammer) Pleiadians showed him how their UFO
functions, but they did not tell him to build his own craft or
that such human-built craft would be needed to evacuate the
Earth.

BUDD HOPKINS He distrusts and holds a low opinion of PEOPLE and
therefore is likewise negative about ETs. He agrees with the bad
guys that ETs are evil, and the bad guys feed him
disinformation.

LINDA MOULTON HOWE This scientifically minded investigator has
adapted to what she perceives as a dark, controlled world, and
believes that the only way to get the truth is to play ball with
the bad guys.

DAVID ICKE Disinformers wanting to derail this passionate and
effective speaker helped convince him go to outlandish extremes
in his allegations against reptilians.

DAVID JACOBS He wants to be a good guy but has been groomed and
controlled by bad guys. He knows something is wrong but refuses
to look at it. He thinks all ETs are evil.

JIM KEITH He put his subjective interpretation on much of his
information, and in this he was influenced by his fear-based
perspective. So despite his good intentions, much of his
information is unreliable.

GUY KIRKWOOD (Mel Noel) He saw a couple of UFOs as an Air Force
pilot, but he exaggerates his experiences and he fabricated
additional stories based on rumors he heard.

PHILIP KLASS He is a genuine skeptic who says what he believes,
though the government can sometimes manipulate him. His passion
is due to his own abductions, unknown to his conscious mind.

PHILLIP KRAPF This former Los Angeles Times editor and author of
The Contact Has Begun is sincere. However, he repressed
everything that was traumatic about his abductions, and what he
consciously remembers is very distorted.

JOHN LEAR Bad guys abducted him multiple times to find out what
he learned from his father, and they use him as an unknowing
funnel for disinformation.

WILLIAM LEAR He had connections to the inner circle. He was
truthful in what he shared with his son John, but he withheld
much.

MICHAEL MALIN Those in the inner circle of NASA decide which
photographs they want the public to see and release them through
Malin. They hide, confuse, debunk or spin any information
relating to ETs.

TRICIA McCANNON She is spiritually oriented and inspires a lot
of people, and her reading of the Akashic records is fairly
accurate, but her psychic work is impaired by personal emotional
needs.

ROYCE J. MYERS III He is connected with a low-level government
power-elite collaborative circle. However, his UFO Watchdog Web
site is a private-group debunking effort done for the fun of
bashing ufologists and causing dissension in and deterring
potential new members from joining the UFO Community.

TED OLIPHANT He is putting out disinformation on cattle
mutilations, directing blame toward the military and away from
ETs. He hopes that by cooperating with the disinformers he will
learn the truth.

KEVIN RANDLE He is a puppet of the military, who have planted
thoughts in his mind that help them control him.

JONATHAN REED He stumbled upon a black operation and became the
victim of a mind control experiment whereby he was induced to
put out a controversial and scary story.

JEFF RENSE He thinks he and not Art Bell should be number one,
yet he too values entertainment over truth. If it's
anti-conspiracy, anti-government, anti-secrecy or anti-Art Bell,
he promotes it.

DAVID ROCKEFELLER There is an elite group of Rockefellers and
trusted associates that David has not been fully accepted into,
and that group was itself somewhat kicked out of Robert
Bigelow�s circle.

CARL SAGAN He told as much as he thought he could, but he worked
for the government and played their game. His novel Contact was
a controlled information leak by good guys within the power
elite.

RAY SANTILLI Good guys in the military who want to inform the
public truthfully tried to give him a genuine �Alien Autopsy�
film, but bad guys took it back and gave him two fake films.

GORDON-MICHAEL SCALLION He is receiving prophetic visions of
worst case scenarios. He tends to promote fear by being
fatalistic about his visions; actually they are meant to be
wake-up calls.

JOHN SCHUESSLER This MUFON director is enough in the power elite
inner circle to be used by them but not enough in the circle to
know much inside information or to know that he is being used.

ROBERT SHAPIRO There is a lot of filtering in his channeling.
Also he has contacts with negative beings who are feeding him
misinformation and affecting the channeling.

DAVID SHOEMAKER He is telling the truth about having pieces from
a crashed UFO, but they were given to him by ETs, not by a human
friend, and they came from a UFO crash on the Moon, not from a
crash in the Midwest. His memory of his ET communications is
distorted.

DENNIS STACY He is a genuine skeptic whose sense of "things
aren't as they seem" and "something isn't right" is rooted in
his own power elite and military-ET collaborative abductions. He
sometimes grasps at straws in making arguments to support his
skepticism, and may debunk valid UFO incidents.

WILLIAM THOMAS He is not involved with the government, but his
information is unreliable due to his own ideas or "spin" that he
puts on it. There are three main kinds of chemtrails: (1)
aluminum particles to reflect solar radiation and counteract
global warming, (2) a racially targeted AIDS-like biological
agent for population control, and (3) chemical warfare testing
of different chemicals in local areas.

VAL VALERIAN (John Grace) It is as if there is the physical
shell of a person with no one inside. The meaning of this
psychic image is not known, and his categorization on this list
is in question.

TOM VAN FLANDERN He is a man serving two masters, the first a
quest for truth as embodied by his friend Richard Hoagland, and
the second the agenda and expectations of those he works with
and for at NASA.

JOHN VASQUEZ His memory of the Fort Benning incident is highly
distorted due to mind control he was subjected to. Actually
reptilians landed at the base and tricked the military as to
their purpose.

VICTOR He does not realize that the Alien Interview film he
"smuggled" out of Area 51 was intentionally leaked through him,
and that it had been tampered with so as to contain a mixture of
real and false content. DONALD WARE He is very well intended but
he doesn't want to see anything negative and is blind to whom he
is aligning himself with. The bad guys are not manipulating him
at present because they don't need to.

ORSON WELLES The power elite drugged and hypnotized him to
influence him to broadcast his War of the Worlds adaptation.
They did this to find out how the public would react to an ET
invasion and to discredit actual contacts.

RANDOLPH WINTERS It is as if he is two people, one who is honest
and reports what he sees, and the other (induced?) who is
putting out disinformation on behalf of the government.


The Bad

Knowingly compromises the truth in a major way

ADRAIN The Billy Meier-like UFO incidents reported in connection
with him are false.

JOHN ALEXANDER He is in the loop of the part of the military
complex under private control that deals with ETs. As Robert
Bigelow's spokesperson, he knows about three-quarters of what
Bigelow knows.

ROBERT BIGELOW There is little this member of the power elite
doesn't know about government involvement with ETs. He is
staunchly fundamentalist-religious and believes ETs are evil
gods. He created NIDS (the National Institute for Discovery
Science) to vacuum UFO information and become a trusted
organization to handle the ET situation, but many in the UFO
Community did NOT trust it, and it is being downgraded. He has
paid investigators to gather information for him and at the same
time to discredit them in the eyes of their colleagues. He is
too cocky to have had a psychic shield placed around him.

GLENN CAMPBELL He was paid by the military-industrial complex to
create the Ufomind Web site as a vehicle for releasing
disinformation and monitoring what people believe about UFOs.

MARTIN CANNON Now semi-retired, this mind control researcher has
done what he has been told to do by his government employers
(likely the Navy or possibly the Air Force).

ED DAMES He is a paid disinformer who recruits remote viewers
for the government. He makes overblown claims and he spreads
fear by prophesying cataclysmic events.

FRANK DRAKE He is a military intelligence insider who knows a
lot about ET-human contact. As the first director of SETI, he
knew its true purposes to monitor secret satellites, monitor
UFOs, and be a trusted institution through which a faked
announcement of ET contact could be made.

CAMERON DUNCAN He is not to be trusted.

RICHARD HALL There is a psychic shield around him of a spiritual
nature, suggesting that he may be involved in a future scenario
that is important not to be interfered with by revealing
information about him. BILL HOLDEN He is a self-promoter who
occasionally is a useful fool for disinformers. His story about
seeing a UFO while aboard Air Force One with President Kennedy is
a fabrication.

JACK HOUCK He works for the government in the mind control
industry, and has trained soldiers in the use of mind control
technology. He uses spoon bending parties and remote viewing
classes to recruit for the government. He is a very, very
serious man.

GEORGE KNAPP He worked in Area 51 and now works for an Area 51
disinformation intelligence collection group, putting out what
information they tell him to. He believes their information.

TED KOPPEL He knows a little bit about UFOs but less than Dan
Rather. Power and money is what matters to him. He looks benign,
but inside he's just the opposite. He says and does whatever is
necessary to get where he wants to go, and doesn't care who he
steps on in the process. Like everyone else in top positions of
mainstream news organizations, he knows that freedom of the
press is nonexistent.

KAL KORFF A psychic shield has been placed around him,
suggesting that there is more to his debunking than personal
beliefs.

BRUCE MACCABEE Access to information about this photo analyst is
blocked psychically, apparently due to a connection he has with
the military. His placement on this list is in question.

PETER MOON He is a disinformer. There is a clue to this in his
choice of his last name.

DAVID MOREHOUSE He works for the government. His story about
being a remote viewer martyr was invented to gain sympathy from
the public.

ROBERT MORNING SKY He has a big ego and loves to be on stage,
plus he has a big interest in ufology, so he invented the story
about his grandfather rescuing an ET from a crashed UFO.

EDDIE PAGE He is a disinformer. His story about being a
human-Pleiadian hybrid was a fabrication.

HAL PUTHOFF As chairman of the board of Robert Bigelow's NIDS
and a good friend of Bigelow, he is part of the same power elite
but is less of an insider.

ROBERT RAITH He is being well paid by the government to
disinform.

NICK REDFERN He is a disinformer. His citing of a report that
retroviruses were found in ET bodies from a crashed UFO is an
example of his disinformation.

RICHARD SAUDER He is paid to disinform and to infiltrate the UFO
community. When the existence of underground bases is finally
acknowledged, his job will be to justify their existence.

DONALD SCHMITT The truth about him is guarded by a government
psychic protection force that powerfully repels anyone who uses
psychic means in a persistent manner to gain access.

JAIME SHANDERA He has a psychic shield likely from the same
source as that protecting Donald Schmitt.

LEE SHARGEL He is a disinformer who is inactive because the
government didn't like the positive ET spin he put on the story
he invented involving dolphinoid beings impressing a heart on
his chest, etc.

WILLIAM SHATNER After Gene Roddenberry told him about his desert
ET contact, Shatner retold the story but made himself the
contactee and added a part about how the ETs had come to rescue
him.

JOSEPH SMITH His story about finding what became the holy
scripture for the Mormon Church was a fraud. He was a member of
the power elite who considered himself a god and created his own
world.

CLIFFORD STONE He was never part of a UFO crash retrieval team.
He developed his stories, which there is not much truth in,
because he wanted to be part of the circle of ufologists.

STEWART SWERDLOW He is a disinformer. There is a psychic shield
around him which likely is a combination of military and
soul-level.

JACQUES VALLEE He is part of the private industry group that
wants to control the ET agenda, and toward this end he puts out
disinformation. He helped dissuade the U.N. from investigating
UFOs.

ROBERT WOOD He is a member of MJ-12, the agenda of which is to
disinform and to gather information, including finding out what
the UFO Community is doing. He thinks ETs are trying to take
over the Earth.

RYAN WOOD "Like father, like son." He has been well trained and
well groomed by father Robert, but the son has doubts about
whether he is on the right side. He thinks there might be some
positive ETs.


The Government Validates Baktar'S Information

We learned that Baktar's information is accurate enough and
important enough to cause the government considerable concern
when they began interfering with the channeling on the day after
the information was put out on the Internet.

On the afternoon of April 29, the connection between the channel
and the entity she was channeling, Quan Yin, was forcibly broken
at a point in the channeling when Quan Yin turned from talking
about other subjects to talking about the Good, Bad & Ugly list.
A psychic healer who was present saw two energy beams, one
vertical and one horizontal, intersecting at the spot the
channel was seated. We believe that the vertical one was a
locating beam from a satellite and that the horizontal one was
an electronically generated beam from a vehicle on the ground,
capable of taking the channel out of her channeling brain wave
state and thereby terminating the channeling. The channel tried
to get back into trance but could not do so.

On the morning of May 4, now in a different city, the channel
again went into trance and began channeling information for the
Good, Bad & Ugly list, but at about the 45 minute mark her
channeling was again disrupted. This time she was able to stay
in trance by she and Baktar placing themselves inside a
protective energy bubble. However, the bubble prevented Baktar
from bringing any information through about other people, so we
gave up on the session.

On the evening of the same day, while the channel was channeling
about the list in yet a different city, she was again hit by the
same type of disruptive energy beam, but this time she was
channeling an entity named Solgern who, like Kryon, is in charge
of regulating cosmic energies. Solgern absorbed the government's
beam into his own, stronger energy and thereby transmuted it
into a nondisruptive form. Unable to stop the channeling, the
government agents projected fear into Solgern's information
(apparently this can be done electronically as well as by
psychics). Solgern could have screened this out, but he let it
through in order to show the channel and the rest of us who were
present what this fear energy felt like in contrast to his own
loving energy, in order to help us develop our powers of
discernment.

Besides the interference with the channeling, on the morning of
April 30, the second day after we had put the list out on the
Internet, one of us happened to be at home, outdoors, when a
large, light-colored helicopter flew directly toward his house,
veered away, then at exceptionally low altitude flew one full
circle around him and the house before returning in the
direction from which it had come. When we asked Baktar about
this incident, he perceived two occupants in the helicopter but
was unable to perceive their motives due to psychic shielding
that had been placed around them.

There has been only one attempt at government interference in
the channenling since the foregoing events, and that came at a
point in one of the channelings when the subject of the
international sex slave trade was being discussed.

Baktar told us there were four factors that had attracted the
government monitoring and interference: (1) we were using
channeling to access hidden information, and the government
knows how powerful a tool channeling is, (2) we demonstrated an
understanding of different kinds of psychic shielding, (3) we
identified some government disinformers and (4) we identified a
soul catcher implant that had been placed in Richard Boylan. The
government does not have as much to worry about as it might
because Baktar will not put out any information that would get
us into serious trouble. Nevertheless, it is apparent that his
information has ruffled some feathers.


Whose Truth Will You Choose?

Those in power put out spin and disinformation to portray ETs as
a threat so that the public will turn to them for help and grant
them even greater power in order to defend against the threat.
As a second level of spin and disinformation, the power elite
(secret societies and private industry) portray elected
government as not being able to be trusted to deal with the ET
threat and the military as not being up to the challenge so that
the public will turn to them, the power elite, to handle things.

Self-serving ETs put out their own spin and disinformation. They
say, "We are your friends, we have valuable things to give you
(especially technology), and we will help save your planet's
ecology, so you should trust us, trade with us (be willing to
trade away Earth resources), and make deals with us."
Ironically, the government is willing to deal with the negative
ETs but not the positive ones. The two think alike, both being
in pursuit of self-interest and power over others, so they work
together trying to out-manipulate each other to get what each
wants.

The positive ETs, who genuinely have our interest at heart
because they are spiritual, compassionate beings, will help us
if we ask them to (we have to ask because they honor the
principle of noninterference) but what they require of us is
something the government and the power elite have not been
willing to give: honesty, openness, good will, and honoring of
individual freedom to choose one's own reality.

Copyright (c) Friends of Baktar 2001

Feel free to post or circulate this document for noncommercial
purposes

Full-length personal profiles will be coming soon!



========== Bobbie "Jilain" Felder - -> backwoods of Mississippi -
-> USA - -> planet Earth - -> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com Point of View Webcast www.dragoncrest.net Online
publishing ==========








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:31:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:44:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:54:33 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:25:44 -0500

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 01:55:27 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Bob,

 >>Listfolk may be interested in hearing who the Einstein was who
 >>thought up the Venus explanation. It was an associate of Allen
 >>Hynek, a systems engineer named William T. Powers, who worked at
 >>Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory. Powers suggested
 >>it in a phone conversation with Blue Book's Maj. Quintanilla.
 >>Later, after Powers had seen the evidence in its totality, he
 >>retracted the explanation and apologized for his role in
 >>suggesting it to the Air Force.

 >He was a fool.

I would like to think you mean Maj Quintanilla, who virtually
defined the word, but I suppose you mean Powers. Yes, he was a
fool for proposing the Venus explanation, and a wise man for
retracting it. Anybody who continues to believe Spaur, et al.,
saw Venus is an even bigger fool.

 >>"Apparently I found out considerably more about this event than
 >>the Air Force investigator did," Powers wrote Spaur in May 1966,
 >>"because I cannot agree with the evaluation publicly released a
 >>few days after the sighting [that Spaur et al. had initially
 >>seen a satellite, then Venus]... I now understand that you and
 >>other witnesses did notice Venus and the Moon, and saw the
 >>object in motion relative to them, as well as being able to see
 >>a shape. At no time, however, did I suppose that the earlier
 >>part of the sighting [explained as an Echo satellite] involved
 >>anything other than an [unidentified] airborne object."

 >What about the later chase of Venus? If Spaur noticed Venus and
 >the UFO earlier, why did he chase the planet into Pennsylvania?
 >It doesn't add up, Jerry, unless you are saying that Spaur _at
 >no time_ chased Venus.

Fortunately, we have the detailed investigative report of Bill
Weitzel, the one individual who conducted a comprehensive
inquiry into this intriguing, still unexplained case. Witness
descriptions are in no way consistent with Venus, at least the
Venus with which the rest of us are familiar. The Magic Venus of
Bob Young - the one that can do just about anything required to
dispatch the troubling questions raised by UFO sightings - is,
of course, another matter.

As Allen Hynek told Blue Book, "the observers [saw] Venus _as
well as_ the UFO. The officers did not know Venus by name, but
they confirmed that there was a 'bright spot near the moon.' On
that morning Venus was just a few degrees to the upper right of
the moon. The observers indicated that as the dawn light
increased but before sunrise, the silhouette of the UFO became
more distinguishable; quite the opposite would have happened
with Venus as dawn light brightened."

 >>Amusingly, when Quintanilla explained his theory about the case
 >>to Spaur's boss, Portage County Sheriff Ross Dustman, Dustman
 >>(in his words) "laughed out loud." Seems the only reasonable
 >>response.

 >A perfect ufological Tale of Two Cities. Jerry things the
 >Sherrif was laughing at Quintanilla, but I suspect he was
 >guffawing at Spaur.

I'll bet you do. In your universe, wishful thinking trumps
reality every time. Sheriff (not Sherrif) Dustman said about the
absurd explanation Blue Book (as well as, of course, you and
your fellow debunkers) have peddled: "I go along with my men. It
was not a satellite and not Venus. I've seen Venus many times,
but I never saw Venus 50 feet above a road and moving from side
to side like this was.... I have never seen Venus controlled
like this seemed to be."

Except for two brief phone conversations Quintanilla had with
Spaur, Blue Book came to its conclusions _without interviewing a
single witness_. As Spaur put it, "I'm definitely sure that I
wasn't chasing Venus or observing Venus and running wildly over
the countryside. I'm not that bad off." Sheriff Dustman,
wherever he is, must still be laughing - this time, I'm afraid,
at you.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                         Re: Talk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:46:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:52:07 -0500


Dennis,

 >Here's an alternative reading of the Air Force's comments. I'm
 >sure there are probably others.

 >The Air Force essentially took the Tales of Kaufmann, Glen
 >Dennis and some others at face value. They then said, since we
 >didn't recover any alien bodies at Roswell, how might the idea
 >that we did have arisen? Here's one possibility, and, yes, we
 >realize that there is a time discrepancy, but maybe the
 >witnesses misremembered the timing of events.

You are a charitable man, my friend. Condon and Blue
Book could have used you in their p.r. offices. Maybe
you'd be so persuasive that we'd actually end up grateful
for lousy, dishonest explanations of UFO reports.

 >Of course, there was an alternative. The Air Force could have
 >said, "Well, to tell the truth, we think these people are, uh
 >liars, or, if you prefer, simply exaggerators."

What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

And what would have stopped the AF from charging that the
informants were hoaxers? That never stopped Blue Book, which
didn't hesitate to call witnesses hoaxers whether they were or
not.

 >Would you have preferred that approach to the one they took?

Yes, in point of fact. Wouldn't you? It would have been more
honest, but I guess that's an adjective one seldom has occasion
to use when one is discussing the Air Force and UFOs.


 >BTW, wasn't there also a GAO investigation of Roswell? Remember
 >reading _anything_ favorable about its conclusions in the UFO
 >press?

Uh, do ufologists have some obligation, unlike other citizens,
to praise government actions mindlessly and endorse official
conclusions unthinkingly? Ufologists quite rightly were
unsatisfied and/or suspicious, given the long, sorry history of
government mishandling of UFO issues.

 >Just checked the Index of the 2nd ed. of your UFO Encyclopedia
 >and didn't see either General Accounting Office or Steven Schiff
 >listed.

Huh? What does this have to do with anything? In any event,
you're wrong. The GAO is mentioned on page 266 of the second
edition. What's your point, anyway?

 >Anyway, I look forward to ufology's reviews of Pflock's Roswell:
 >Incon- venient Facts and the Will to Believe.

The first will be in IUR, I believe the very next issue of same.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                     Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:18:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:49:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young


 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:52:07 +0100
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One?

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:18:38 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:21:19 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Have Sceptics Seen One? - Young

 >>These Gallup Polls have a margin of error of 3 points. By the
 >>early 90's the number had gotten up to 14 percent, but has since
 >>dropped.

 >>Do you have a recent Gallup Poll question on UFO witnesses which
 >>is significantly different?


 >Hey Bob,

 >This is kind of futile, I mean it's what sceptics enjoy doing
 >best coming up with polls and stats,

You are the one who asked for statistics, I gave them to you,
but you refuse to offer anything substantial in reply, only B.S.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

             Evidence First - What Of Experience Or Disclosure?

From: skywatcher22@space.com
Date: 24 May 2001 08:22:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:52:01 -0400
Subject: Evidence First - What Of Experience Or Disclosure?

Esteemed UFO Researchers,

There is an old saying that it only takes one white crow to
prove that not all crows are black.

As an experiencer, one has a look at some white crows or gray as
the case may be.

As non-experiencers, we have several degrees of belief and
non-belief. I have seen a spectrum of belief on this list that
ranges from complete skepticism to strong acceptance. I have
discovered that strong believers usually have had sightings or
encounters or a strong proclivity for accepting unconventional
or unpopular ideas.

Those without experiences with the UFO phenomena are sometimes
convinced by testimony or evidence even if the evidence is
sparse. Others reject testimony but may accept some evidence.
Some reject all evidence as it has not been examined by those
considered authoritative. None of this is unusual.

There is a special kind of witness. This witness has usually
held a position in government or military service and usually
volunteers details of a sighting, encounter, or view of physical
artifacts. I have noticed that it is this type of witness that
is viewed with greater suspicion, even more so when no
background search validates the witnesses' statements.

OK, what is my point?

My point is that we need a protocol and a checklist for both
witnesses and verifying evidence. When such a protocol is
adhered to and a final report is given it should be passed on to
a review group to pass on it or not. Again, this is just a
suggestion and one that would involve cooperation and
collaboration among researchers.

Heck, by this time, we need an "Institute for UFO Studies" just
to elevate these studies to an academic level.

I also feel that we need volunteers who will take an active
approach to the UFO problem and seek to gather evidence by going
to UFO hot spots and making a thorough record of any ongoing
sighting or encounter via instruments and equipment that can be
audio, video, chart recordings for later examination and
evaluation. Even a mobile unit with racks of equipment would
help. How much $$ would it take? Would it pay off?

I have attempted to urge as much participation as possible on my
own Skywatch list and have noticed more of a tendency for
passivity than activity. On this list I see many who seem to be
active, but all seem to operate more or less independently. So,
I for one, would like to see a trend toward more
collaboration...unless all the solo researchers out there think
they can handle this alone or go on thinking that the other
guy's views are made in the dark.

Stepping down from my soapbox now with these parting words... I
think you are all doing a good job and can really understand the
differing points of views, even from the curmudgeons.

Sincerely,

Bill Hamilton











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:32:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:53:34 -0400
Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Clark


 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 18:24:49 EDT
 >>Subject: New Karl Pflock Book
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Mac,

 >As a Roswell agnostic who's read all of the skeptical Roswell
 >literature as well as the salient "pro" Roswell books, I
 >sometimes wish an author would have the guts to admit we just
 >don't know for sure what exactly happened.

Bravo! Couldn't have said it better myself. Of course human
beings will go to any length to avoid uttering the dread words
"We don't know." And let me add that, barring some extraordinary
development (i.e., the discovery of relevant documents of
unquestioned provenance), we aren't likely _ever_ to know for
sure, despite the best efforts of a lot of good people (and some
not-so-good people).

Sadly, the investigation did not begin until 30 years after the
fact. Beyond that, it suffered all kinds of problems, some in
the nature of things, some caused by dishonest informants and
various red herrings. At this stage Roswell seems hopeless --
the reason, incidentally, I devoted comparatively little space
to it in my encyclopedia.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:07:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:56:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:50:11 +1200
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sawers

 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:43:10 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Felder

<snip>

 >I think Corso was an American and he was proud of _that_!
 >A man of his stature that stood in the background as a
 >'spook', without any recognition, was going to soil his and
 >his families name hereafter with blatant lies!?

 >Nah. I don't buy it.

Maybe that's why he did it: to get the recognition he had been
denied because of his position and the classified nature of
material he dealt with. It could be, I suppose, that he just
finally got pissed off enough that he wanted credit for doing
something with his life. There could be a number of reasons, and
we're not going to figure it out on this email list.

I do think that the motivation for his "factual misstatements"
is important. But whatever the reason, it doesn't change the
fact that there are "factual misstatements", whether purposeful
or not, and those transgressions tarnish the whole work.

 >The same way you were "had" over not recognizing the
 >significance of the AA. You got mixed up in the politics and
 >business aspirations rather than what was _really_ going on.
 >You fell into the debunkers trap, scared that your valuable
 >reps would be tarnashed.

The above is not addressed to me personally, is it? If so, you
got your facts a little off there. I knew the AA film was bogus
the first time I saw it. A first-year nursing student knows more
about maintaining sterile technique than the dorks in that film.

And I don't have a rep to tarnish :)


Bobbie

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Serious Research - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 12:19:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:57:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Salvaille


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:10:10 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000

<snip>

 >"Within a few days of its occurrence, Philip Klass, an aviation
 >journalist, propounded that the object was merely 'a bolide of
 >the Orionid meteor shower.' Klass maintains that position to
 >this day. Repeatedly asked to submit a second-by-second
 >time-line analysis based on his own research, Klass has
 >steadfastly declined to do so. Klass and Coyne have never met.
 >Klass has never visited the site of the encounter. His only
 >contact with the nine visual and two sound-and-light witnesses
 >has consisted of two phone calls to Coyne and a talk-show chat
 >and supper with [helicopter crew member Sgt. John] Healey. When
 >I asked Klass why he had never talked to the witnesses, he wrote
 >that he 'didn't have to talk to the witnesses: Woodward and
 >Bernstein never talked to Nixon.'"

 >For a full account of Zeidman's investigationi of this
 >remarkable and still unexplained encounter, see Chapter 29 of
 >Peter A. Sturrock's The UFO Enigma.

<snip>

Better still:

For the full report:

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/zeidman/i.html

For Zeidman's rebutal of Klass:

http://www.msatech.com/nuforc/Coyne.html

This brings into the light the kind of intellectual honesty
skeptics have trademarked.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Serious Research - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 12:24:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:59:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Salvaille


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 12:19 JVTV
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:10:10 -0500

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000

Coyne case correction:

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/zeidman/toc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                             UFO ROUNDUP Delayed

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:33:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:00:47 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP Delayed


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

This weeks issue of the bulletin will be delayed as Joe is not
well at the moment. The bulletin will be sent when I receive it.

Regards,

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com> or use
the Sighting Report Form at:

http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences,
UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of
Filer's Files and Oz 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Rogue River Sighting - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks RB47Expert@aol.com
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:08:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:02:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Sparks


 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 00:10:00 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:02:26 +0200
 >>From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Additional (?) FOIA docs John Greenewald Jr's website
 >>www.blackvault.com

 >>http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb28.htm

 >>http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb34.htm


 >Thanks for alerting me to these documents. I did not have them,
 >since they were in the WPAFB section of the BB/AFOSI file. (I
 >searched west coast districts that could have investigated. The
 >name of a witness is clearly present in one document. Now we
 >know that the sketch which appears in the Special Report was
 >actually drawn by a witness and not by one of the Battelle
 >analysts simply based on the description. I copied the .gif
 >documents, inverted them (black to white) and printed out.

 >There is a list of names of people who got copies of a letter
 >written by Mr. Don(?) Murphy(?), Denphy(?) whatever, is very
 >interesting. I note that Vandenburg was on the list a mere 7
 >months (?) after he rejected the Estimate of the Situation (we
 >are told) Wonder if a copy could be found in his files or in the
 >files of the ther men Hunsaker

Hi Bruce,

I am the person who spotted the witness' name and emailed you
about it the day before yesterday. After printing out the
documents positive and negative I can now clearly read the name
as Don Heaphy. Thanks to Jim Klotz who suggested that spelling
among others.

These other names of Vandenberg, Hunsaker, Condon, et al., are
simply the NACA Council membership list NOT the distribution
list for the report.


 >etc.

 >Is that Edward U Condon, fifth name down the list?

 >Will post this material as an update to my web site
 >presentation.!

 >Looks as if we need some group effort to read the unreadable
 >letter... although I suspect it says little more than is already
 >available in the interview reports I posted.

I have the full text read.

Regards,

Brad Sparks











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:29:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:14:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >>that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >>says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >>been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >>was in such an outfit.

 >>Jan Aldrich

 >Hi Jan,

 >As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
 >or ever existed.
<snip>

 >Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
 >program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
 >doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
 >program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
 >from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
 >program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
 >in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

This makes no sense at all. Blue Book was not a TS Codeword
program. MJ-12 was purportedly set up by Truman to control _all_
UFO information, not just its own supposedly limited
jurisdiction (by your theory).

 >For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
 >clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
 >dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
 >clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
 >systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
 >the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
 >medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
 >people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
 >people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

This again makes no sense. The MJ-12 Committee members were the
top purported _policymakers_ who had to have access to _all_
information in order to set UFO policy even if lower level
personnel were all compartmented. Menzel was an alleged member
of the MJ-12 Committee, not some lower level scientist
consultant as you seem to be treating him here.


 >Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
 >denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
 >called basic information.

No way, I don't buy it. Menzel did not just have purported
"MJ-12 clearance" but was himself allegedly a member of the
elite MJ-12 Committee.

 >As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >classified side to it.

This is untrue. We have plenty of information directly from BB
personnel who have been interviewed, BB's superiors whom I
interviewed (Gen. Garland, Col. Bower, et al.), Ruppelt's
papers, BB documents _not_ in the National Archives such as
those in Hynek's files, CIA, etc., NONE of which shows any
"highly classified" or TS Codeword type side to it.


 >If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

That's not what the bogus Eisenhower Briefing Document says --
it says MJ-12 had "liason" (stupidly misspelled twice by the
hoaxer) with BB's head, _not_ a secretary or a lesser person
than the BB chief Ruppelt.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:26:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:03:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:17:42 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Heard of Todd and have communicated with him, until his letters
 >became nasty and I saw no need to continue.

I understand he's now flunked out out of four, count 'em, four,
Charm Schools now.

<snip>

 >You might remember that it was Don Schmitt and I who exposed the
 >majority of the Gerald Anderson tale. You might also remember
 >that I was the first to interview him and in the search for
 >corroboration of his tale learned that he wasn't exactly who he
 >said he was, starting with his tales of being a Navy SEAL and
 >continuing through his forged telephone bill.
 >
 >You might also remember that it was I who exposed J. Bond
 >Johnson's ever-changing tale of what happened in General Ramey's
 >office and I suggested that the Barney Barnett tale does not fit
 >into the story in any way. Much of the negative material about
 >the Roswell case, such as the tale of Jim Ragsdale and Glenn
 >Dennis was exposed through work that I did.

 >And yes, I take responsibility for reporting on these tales in
 >the first place.

 >I was the first to talk to Ragsdale, though Schmitt got the
 >first long interview with him. I talked to Glenn Dennis briefly
 >before Friedman, but then cancelled the longer, scheduled
 >interview after Friedman asked that we not talk to Dennis and
 >that he would share with us everything that he got from Dennis
 >in return. Friedman thought that another interview, within a
 >week or two of his long one would spook Dennis. Now, I look back
 >and see that Dennis, always seemingly reluctant to talk was
 >always persuaded to talk.

 >I have tried to report on all aspects of the Roswell case,
 >telling everything that I knew that had relevance to
 >understanding the case so that those who hadn't had the
 >opportunity to speak with the witnesses, who hadn't had a chance
 >to review the evidence would be able to do so. That is why, in
 >The Roswell Encyclopedia, I included the long section by Kent
 >Jeffrey explaining his beliefs on Roswell without commentary in
 >that segment.


Kevin,

Thanks for your comments, along with your tone and
straightforwardness. I appreciate them. And you've proven Greg
right.

 >And, while you might not like my opinions on the Roswell case,
 >I don't like some of the things I have seen done to the
 >witnesses, many of them honest people.  Others have deserved
 >everything they have gotten.

 >For those who wish to learn something more about the Roswell
 >case, I suggest The Roswell Encyclopedia. For those looking for
 >the other side of the coin, why not pick up Karl Pflock's new
 >book - sorry Karl, I didn't write the name down, but I'm sure
 >you won't mind supplying it. I would also suggest looking at
 >Phil Klass' book about Roswell, though I disagree with much of
 >what he says.

 >And now I will return to working on a book about the sinking of
 >Titanic, which is more fun because, at the very least, I know
 >the ship existed and that it did sink.


Hey, don't we already know how that one turned out?

Just kidding...but thanks again.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                       New 'Face' Pictures At JPL Site

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:28:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:28:36 -0400
Subject: New 'Face' Pictures At JPL Site




From: UFO UpDates - Toronto



http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/



Thanks, YB!

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:58:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:25:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall


 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:16:54 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:03:36 -0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Hall

 >>>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:14:02 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

 >>Bobbie,

 >>Have you ever heard of megalomania? Corso seems to be a prime
 >>candidate for that desriptive label.

 >>Dick Hall

 >ROFL! That's a good word for it! And I think you're probably
 >right in connecting it to Corso. It's just a shame, in my
 >opinion, that the man apparently thought so little of himself
 >and had so little concern for his kids that he felt the need to
 >leave them such a legacy.

 >I guess I just don't understand the apparent need for attention
 >or whatever it is that motivates people like Corso or a certain
 >hot-tubber that shall remain nameless or Dennis "I ate Burger
 >King Whoppers with a Zeti-Reticulan alien" Bossack or What's His
 >Name with the dead alien in his freezer.

Speaking as a former employee of the American Psychological
Association, you need to think of it as a form of mental illness
or disease in the case of megalomania. The underlying causes of
it in a given individual would have to be determined by a
thorough psychological analysis of their personal life,
frustrations, perhaps mistreatment by others.

I have never thought of Corso as being the classic con man,
though that does seem to be the case for some of the others.
Clearly it is a tragedy that his otherwise commendable career
should end up in this way. Another of the major BS artists
(think flashlights) also is clearly a megalomaniac, but in his
case is far more "charismatic" and able to attract a cult-like
following. Even though I intensely dislike what he is doing to
the UFO field, I still make due allowances for possible
psychological problems in his case.

 >People like that is why I gave up listening to Art Bell years
 >ago, however.

Which shows very good judgment on your part. I was a guest on
Art Bell's program years ago, but have since learned to think of
him as a supporter and purveyor of every farout and crackpot
idea under the sun--as long as it attracts a large audience!


Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                     Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:14:15 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:27:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers


 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >I get the weirdest email sometimes! This came today. I don't
 >even know the guy who sent this to me. But since he gives
 >permission to pass it on, I thought I would do just that. This
 >is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. If you need
 >a good laugh, check this out!

<snip>

 >ROYCE J. MYERS III He is connected with a low-level government
 >power-elite collaborative circle. However, his UFO Watchdog Web
 >site is a private-group debunking effort done for the fun of
 >bashing ufologists and causing dissension in and deterring
 >potential new members from joining the UFO Community.

That's right, folks. Here I am, your connection to a low-level
government power-elite collaborative circle. Let me know about
your secret operative and disinformation needs and I could
probably make a phone call or two and get you funded by the big,
bad, evil and quite sinister government. I mean, why do I still
need to work that 40 to 60 hour a week job since I'm getting all
this government money for free? My website is a
"private-group"?? Hey, I'm a big guy, but I don't constitute a
group.


Regards,

Royce J. Myers III

UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind...or your crack pipe after your channeling
session...






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:46:44 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:03:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Ledger


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 04:33:38 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:05:17 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Brad:

 >>It isn't enough that UFO proponents insist on generalizing about
 >>what is shown by the "unidentified" residue, while refusing to
 >>consider the implications of the IFOs, now "bogus" cases which
 >>turn out to be IFOs are not even to be considered an IFO?

 >>C'mon, Brad. How did this incident come to the attention of the
 >>Condon people if it wasn't a "UFO" report? The witnesses
 >>obviously didn't consider it "bogus", or they wouldn't have
 >>bothered to tell anybody.

 >Bob,

 >Do you just deliberately delete all the identifying data from my
 >posts (that this was Case 45 in the Condon Report pp. 395-6) to
 >make it difficult for me and others to reference the facts??? I
 >consider that deliberate obstructionism.

 >This was a crooked fraud by the Condon Committee itself which
 >knew damned well from the start that this was a hot-air balloon
 >prank right from the night of the sighting in Jan 3, 1968, when
 >the call came from the "several persons" (possibly the hoaxers
 >themselves at the launching site) who described an "illuminated
 >transparent object drifting over the town" of Castle Rock,
 >Colo., virtually in the Condon Project's backyard. Notice
 >nothing about a "UFO" in those words used to paraphrase the
 >_accurate_ witn ess reporting in the Condon Report:

 >"illuminated transparent object drifting over the town" (CR p.
 > 395)

 >But the Condon investigators deliberately ignored these
 >_accurate_ witnesses on the night of the sighting. Here they had
 >an Early Warning Network to try to rush investigators to the
 >scene of a UFO sighting hopefully in time to catch the actual
 >UFO while it was still there - but they waited till the "the
 >following evening" (CR p. 396) to go to their own neighborhood
 >of north-central Colorado just 50 miles away, indicating they
 >knew it wasn't a real UFO or anything close to a real UFO so it
 >could wait a day.

 >They waited until "the following evening" to single out and
 >interview instead the _one_ lone _inaccurate_ witness who
 >claimed the garment bag balloon was 75 feet in size so they
 >could beat this strawman to death as proof of the worthlessness
 >of eyewitnesses. They declared the _nutball_ witness the
 >so-called "principal witness" and stonewalled any interviewing
 >of the credible witnesses who made the report in the first
 >place. They referenced this screwball witness again and again
 >(CR pp. 18, 19, 64, 73, 395, 396) while ignoring the hundreds of
 >_accurate_ witness data points compiled on IFO cases that could
 >be used as scientific controls - as I've pointed out repeatedly
 >on UFO UpDates, where I calculate an approximate 97%-98% witness
 >accuracy rate based on 344 data points. See:

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/apr/m11-030.shtml

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/apr/m13-017.shtml

 >After admitting that it was not a good UFO case at all but a
 >"marginal case" (crackpot), Condon himself made this his number
 >one IFO case and lied through his teeth about it, claiming that
 >"some 30 persons reported UFOs, including spacecraft with
 >flashing lights, fantastic maneuverability, and even with
 >occupants presumed to be from outer space. Two days later it was
 >more modestly reported that two high school boys had launched a
 >polyethylene hot-air balloon." (CR p. 18)

 >But in the actual case investigation (CR pp. 395-6) and
 >summaries (CR pp. 64, 73) there isn't a shred of any evidence at
 >all that this was even reported as a "UFO" nor are any of the
 >witnesses quoted saying it was a "spacecraft" - with or without
 >"flashing lights" - or that "occupants" from "outer space" were
 >seen or anything else similar. Nothing at all about any
 >"fantastic maneuverability" - only that the balloon-like object
 >would "drift," that it had "drifting" motion, they were
 >"slow-moving lights" and were seen to "drift" over the nutball
 >witness' location. The Condon Committee debunkers grasped at any
 >straw to discredit UFOs and it can be seen in the outrageously
 >dishonest and despicable treatment of cases such as this which
 >were repeatedly cited over and over to disparage and discredit
 >eyewitness data in general.

 >Had the witnesses stupidly described this as a "spacecraft" with
 >alien "occupants" (plural!!!) you can be sure the Condon
 >Committee debunkers would have seized on it - especially if they
 >could have backed up their lying boss Condon by doing so. Condon
 >was forced to lie his head off to make this his chief exhibit of
 >a UFO and lay the framework for ridicule of witnesses in general
 >- slandering them as so stupid and incompetent as to think a
 >3-foot dry cleaner's bag was a 75-foot spacecraft from outer
 >space - even though no one had said that. Condon had to
 >fabricate these phony crackpot claims and put them in the mouths
 >of the supposed "30" idiot witnesses who never said any such
 >things.

 >The case "came to the attention of the Condon people" because it
 >happened in their backyard so to speak and everyone knew about
 >the Project and where to call.

 >>Clear skies,

 >>Bob Young

 >Clear answers,

 >Brad Sparks


Hi Brad,

Right on. Let's not perpetuate Condon's attempts at finding and
insisting on investigating garbage and just plain nutty reports
in an attempt to discredit other more substantial reports. There
was good work done there but not through any attempts by Condon.

I've been off here for awhile. Did Bob ever answer my question
about his background. Don't know anything about him. He alludes
to amateur astronomy.

Also he didn't respond to my pithy "bullshit" comment which I
thought was well thought out and a model of brevity.

Best,

Don








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 24

                      Re: Did You Make The List? - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 21:53:23 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:04:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Hall


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:14:15 -0700

 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >>I get the weirdest email sometimes! This came today. I don't
 >>even know the guy who sent this to me. But since he gives
 >>permission to pass it on, I thought I would do just that. This
 >>is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. If you need
 >>a good laugh, check this out!

 >>ROYCE J. MYERS III He is connected with a low-level government
 >>power-elite collaborative circle. However, his UFO Watchdog Web
 >>site is a private-group debunking effort done for the fun of
 >>bashing ufologists and causing dissension in and deterring
 >>potential new members from joining the UFO Community.

 >That's right, folks. Here I am, your connection to a low-level
 >government power-elite collaborative circle. Let me know about
 >your secret operative and disinformation needs and I could
 >probably make a phone call or two and get you funded by the big,
 >bad, evil and quite sinister government. I mean, why do I still
 >need to work that 40 to 60 hour a week job since I'm getting all
 >this government money for free? My website is a
 >"private-group"?? Hey, I'm a big guy, but I don't constitute a
 >group.

Shucks, Royce, you don't even rate a "psychic shield." That
appears to be the moral equivalent of a Distinguished Flying
Cross.


Dick Hall, D.F.C., P.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

             New UFO/Police Tapes: Ohio Incident April 24, 2001

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 22:01:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:14:29 -0400
Subject: New UFO/Police Tapes: Ohio Incident April 24, 2001


SUMMATION

On Tuesday, April 25, 2001, a very strange object is reported by
civilians and law enforcement officers in the evening skies near
Waynesville, Ohio in Warren County.

 From their residence near the 4600 Block of Wilkerson Road, a
husband and wife are the first to report a circular lighted
object hovering silently in the sky to the south of their
location. The big light of the UFO, pulsating or changing in
both color and brightness, was said to be encased within a
structure that resembled gridwork or cabling. The couple advised
the Lebanon City Police Department of the object around 10:15
p.m. and the Warren County Communications Center dispatched a
Waynesville police officer to the location.

Upon arrival at the scene, the Waynesville officer confirmed the
unidentifiable nature of the object and also reported that a
second UFO was also in the area.

As other officers respond to the location and continue to view
the abnormalities, dispatchers at the Warren County
Communications Center telephone a base operator at Wright
Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton/Fairborne, Ohio and also
places a call to Airborne Express at the Wilmington Airport in
Clinton County, Ohio. Both flight control facilities deny any
knowledge of or responsibility for air traffic in the
Waynesville, Ohio vicinity during the incident.

While the Waynesville police officers view the object from
Wilkerson Road looking south, a police dispatcher also observes
the same object from her position at the Warren County
Communications Center in Lebanon, Ohio, looking north toward
Waynesville. From review of the police tapes, it can be
estimated that the primary object may have been in a general
location between Waynesville and Lebanon near the intersections
of Pekin Road and Route 42.

An officer with the Caesar's Creek State Police also notes the
UFO from his location to the east of Waynesville. A third UFO is
sighted in the area during the event, and the police witnesses
repeatedly affirm a cogent distinction between the suspected
UFOs and routine stars and airplanes. The objects move off by
receding further into the distance as other officers from the
Ohio State Patrol arrive on the scene.

Dispatchers at the Ohio State Patrol and the Warren County
Communications Center express frustration at having to handle
this situation and their inability to address the reports and
eyewitness confirmation from their officers.

The next evening, Wednesday, April 25, UFOs are again reported
in the same area at 9:48 p.m., viewed from Wilkerson Road and
also by officers observing from a location near the Waynesville
Airport. Disturbingly, another unusual object is seen in the
area seven hours later and reportedly pursues a motorist near
Genntown, Ohio (about 5-miles from Waynesville). A female
complainant advises the Ohio State Patrol of her 'extreme
concern' regarding a triangular object with "super bright
lights" that pursued her automobile while traveling on Route 122
at 5:00 a.m., April 26.

These and other details were acquired from eyewitness
interviews, analysis of various police reports and evaluation of
police tapes acquired through the Warren County Director of
Emergency Services. Additional data was gathered through field
investigation conducted on April 27th and April 28th.

Consideration has been given to the possibility that this
situation was engendered by a misperception of routine stars and
planets by both civilians and police officers on both evenings.
This theory was first advanced by Peter Davenport of the
National UFO Reporting Center, who was advised of the incident
by the Ohio State Patrol while the sighting was in progress. The
star 'Sirius' was identified by Davenport as a likely candidate
for misperception, but after sober review of the police tapes
acquired from the Warren County Department of Emergency
Services, this attempt at explanation is not looked upon
favorably.


INVESTIGATION LOG
(NOTE: These entries will appear on the website URL listed below
when finalized)

        Initial Investigation
        Interview with primary witnesses
        Correspondence and additional police inquiries
        Field Investigation
        Transcript of police tapes
        Correspondence from O.S.P. regarding videotapes
        Map of area
        Photographs of area
        Drawing of object

=========================

TRANSCRIPT OF TAPES

Note: The police tapes of the April 24th incident were acquired
on May 15, 2001 from Carol Sigler, Warren County Director of
Emergency Services after written request to her office. The
tapes were assembled from the various 'tracks' and edited for
brevity and privacy considerations, and also arranged in
presumed chronological order.

Section ONE: Initial call

WCCC Dispatcher #1: Warren County Police and Fire, this is Jesse?

LEBANON DISPATCHER: Hey this is Lebanon, P.D.

WCCC Dispatcher:    Hey.

LEBANON DISPATCHER: Did you get any reports of UFOs in the area
                     today?

WCCC Dispatcher #1: Not yet, how about you?

LEBANON DISPATCHER: Huh? Yeah!

WCCC Dispatcher #1: Oh really?

LEBANON DISPATCHER: Actually from a lady on Wilkerson Lane in
                     Waynesville, to the far, far south of her,
                     she sees a bright colored disk.

WCCC Dispatcher... oooh!

LEBANON DISPATCHER: And I'm not sure where Wilkerson Road is but
                     I'm going to let my guys know about it to
                     see if they see anything but I wondered if
                     you had any reports.

WCCC Dispatcher #1: Wilkerson Road, did she give her address
                     anywhere?

LEBANON DISPATCHER: 4636, she said it's been there for awhile
                     and it's not doing anything.

WCCC Dispatcher #1: She said she's seen a disk in the area?

LEBANON DISPATCHER: It's a bright... she thought it was a plane at
                     first but she says it's a bright colored disk.

WCCC Dispatcher #1: Okay.

LEBANON DISPATCHER: Allrighty.

WCCC Dispatcher #1: I'll send the officers out that way to look.


SECTION 2: Dispatch

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Two-William-Thirty a UFO!

Unit #2W30:         ...Go ahead.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: 4-6-3-6 Wilkerson Road, 4636 Wilkerson Road,
                     the complainant apparently called the
                     Lebanon P.D., advising they see a bright
                     colored disk in the sky.

Unit #2W30          (laughing): ...clear!

WCCC Dispatcher #2: So you're clear at 22:17.

Unit #2W30:         This is Unit #2-William-30, what was the
                     address on that UFO?

WCCC Dispatcher #2: 4-6-3-6 Wilkerson Road, 4636 Wilkerson Road,
                     this is back a long lane straight off of
                     Wilkerson Road between South Main Street and
                     the dead end. Unit #2W30: Clear.


SECTION 3: Citizen complaint


WCCC Dispatcher #3: Warren County Police and Fire, Tonya?

COMPLAINANT:        Oh, this is Warren County?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Yes Ma'am.

COMPLAINANT:        I had just called Lebanon, we were wondering
                     if anyone had reported anything in the sky,
                     there is a light over to the south here and
                     it's not moving and we were wondering if
                     anybody had reported any strange thing.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: You're at 4636 Wilkerson?

COMPLAINANT:        Yeah, you got it.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Okay, Lebanon had just called us with the
                     information and we've got an officer on the
                     way out to check it out. It's in the sky to
                     the south of you?

COMPLAINANT:        Yeah, it's still there. Is he coming out
                     here?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: He's coming out to the area to see if he
                     can't see what you're seeing.

COMPLAINANT:        Oh, well okay.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Allrighty.

COMPLAINANT:        Sure, thank you. Bye bye.


SECTION 4: Verification by officers

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Two-William Thirty, Two William Thirty-One,
                     3-7 @ 22:23, Unit #2W30 break. We've "public
                     service" the residence and they advise the
                     object is stationary in the sky. Unit #2W30:
                     Okay...

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Just south of the residence, in the sky.
                     Unit #2W30: Hey Brad, check back in there to
                     see if that's 4636.

LOCAL:              William 30, Robert 50 local. William 30,
                     Robert 50 local.

Unit #2W30:         Go ahead local.

LOCAL:              Okay, I gotta ask.

Unit #2W30:         Okay, uh... yeah. Are you tied up?

LOCAL:              WHAT IS IT!?

Unit #2W30:         I have NO IDEA, and you wouldn't believe it
                     if you came out and saw it! There's two of
                     them, just sitting stationary and blinking,
                     I mean about five different colors, right
                     here on Wilkerson, just off of South Main
                     Street!

FEMALE OFFICER:     This is 480-16...

Unit #2W30:         I'm not kidding! ...Go ahead.

FEMALE OFFICER:     Okay, we're on the backside of that, here in
                     the lot because I couldn't stand it no more.
                     Where is it at, is it in the air?

Unit #2W30:         In the air! Okay? He's got... the owner of the
                     house has some binoculars and we're looking
                     at these things and uh, it's just... I don't
                     know what they are! They're high up, they
                     look like... uh, they're up there... but with
                     our binoculars though, the ones he's got
                     here, you can see them pretty clearly.
                     There's probably five different colors,
                     there's two of them and they've stayed in
                     the exact same spot the whole time. They're
                     not stars, I can tell you that.

FEMALE OFFICER #2:  This is 480-16, can we come back there with
                     you? We are enroute and have spotted what
                     you're talking about.

Unit #2W30:         I have no idea what it is.

LOCAL:              Okay, I'm looking that way from the office
                     and I can't see anything from up here.

Unit #2W30:         Okay, now there's a plane flying over right
                     where it would be, I don't know if you could
                     see that or not.

LOCAL:              Does the plane have flashing red lights?

Unit #2W30:         ...now right behind that, or to the left of it
                     a little bit, that's it.

LOCAL:              Would it be below the plane?

Unit #2W30:         Well the plane is directly overhead of us
                     now, so I can't really tell.

LOCAL:              Okay, I can tell the plane you are talking
                     about but from up here I can't see anything
                     else but a star.

Unit #2W30:         You wouldn't believe it.

LOCAL:              Can you see that with your eyes or do you
                     have to use binoculars to see it?

Unit #2W30:         I can see the flashing and everything with
                     my eyes, you get the binoculars and you can
                     really see it.

LOCAL:              ...I think I know what you're talking about,
                     I'm going to see if I can see it with my
                     pair of binoculars.

Unit #2W30:         It looks like an orange, kind of a blue, a
                     purple and a red almost with a green.

FEMALE OFFICER:     Are you straight back toward the house?

Unit #2W30:         Come all the way back here, way back on the
                     right, you'll see us standing here on the
                     wall.

FEMALE OFFICER:     All the way back by the picnic?

Unit #2W30:         I see your lights now.

FEMALE OFFICERS:    Okay.

LOCAL:              You've got some pretty lights, anyway.

Unit #2W30:         You see it now?

LOCAL:              Affirmative, I've got a small pair of
                     binoculars, I can definitely see the
                     different colored lights anyway. Unit #2W30:
                     Yeah, that's really... uhhh... the
                     resident's told me they've never seen it
                     before so it's not like it's been there
                     before.

LOCAL:              Okay, there's two of them, right?

Unit #2W30:         The other one is just a little higher to the
                     right of the one that's low, or right by the
                     treeline.

LOCAL:              I'm not going to call it.

Unit #2W30:         I'm not either, I'm not going to even go
                     there. But I... I don't know what it is.

LOCAL:              I can get blue, green, red and white lights
                     is what I'm seeing.

Unit #2W30:         That's what I am seeing.

LOCAL:              But we're not really seeing anything.


SECTION 5: WCCC Inquiry w/WPAFB

WPAFB:              Operator?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hi, this is Tonya, I'm a Warren County
                     Police and Fire dispatch?

WPAFB:              Yeah.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: We've got a Waynesville officers out in the
                     area of Wilkerson Road and they see an
                     object in the sky... a disk shape with
                     multi-colored lights that is stationary in
                     the air. Do you have somebody doing
                     maneuvers down here?

WPAFB:              And where are you?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Warren County. He's in Waynesville and I'm
                     in Lebanon.

WPAFB:              No, we don't have anybody out there as far
                     as I know.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Okay.

WPAFB:              Allright.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Okay, thank you. Bye bye.


SECTION 6: O.S.P. Dispatch


WCCC Dispatcher #2: We called Wright Pat, they don't have
                     anybody in the area doing maneuvers or
                     anything. Okay at 22:35.

Unit #2A51:         Two Adam 51?

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Two Adam 51.

Unit #2A 51:        I'm out here with him.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Three-seven, 22:35. Two-William Thirty?

Unit #2W30:         Two-William Thirty, go ahead.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: For your information, we also notified
                     O.S.P. in reference to the incident.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: I got "The State."

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  State Patrol, this is Taylor.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hi, it's Tonya over at 'the County'. I've
                     got a UFO for you.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  LAUGHING.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: I'm serious.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  I know you are, I've been hearing stuff on
                     the scanner.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: They say if it's in the air, baby, it's
                     yours!

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  So where's it at? (Laughs)

WCCC Dispatcher #3: 4636 Wilkerson Road.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Has it landed? WCCC Dispatcher #3: No, it
                     hasn't landed. The only 'little green man'
                     is the Waynesville officer that's out there.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Has he seen it?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Yeah, they're adamant... it's in the air and
                     it's got multicolored lights & stuff on it.
                     There's two of them. We've called Wright
                     Pat, they're not doing maneuvers. We don't
                     know what it is.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  All right, I'll send them.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: But it's yours!

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Like what are we going to do if it is a
                     UFO?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hey, I can call the National UFO Reporting
                     Center, or better yet, give you the number.

O.S.P. Dispatcher: "MOO-FOO!" It's "Moo-Foo" or something like
                     that, isn't it? "Moo-Foo!" Hah! Allright,
                     I'll call them in just a second.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Allright, bye.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Bye.


SECTION 7: Inquiry w/Wilmington Airport/Airborne Express

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Two William Thirty?

UNIT 2W30:          Two William Thirty.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Do you have any update on your UFO? Post
                     83 is responding and they're requesting an
                     update.

UNIT 2W30:          Okay, ahh... they're still there.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: That's clear. Are you seeing two objects?

UNIT 2W30:          Affirmative.

WCCC Dispatcher #2: Okay, that's clear.

        {WCCC contacts AIRBORN EXPRESS located in Wilmington,
        Ohio (Clinton County) and listens as the call is routed
        through a push-button voice menu selection before being
        transferred to an attendant)

AIRBORNE OPERATOR:  Airborne Operator?

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hi, this is the Warren County Dispatch
                     Center, I need to speak with your Air
                     Traffic Controllers, please.

AIRBORNE OPERATOR:  One moment please.

LISA:               Flight Control, this is Lisa.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hi, this is Tonya, I'm a Warren County
                     Police and Fire dispatcher. I need to know
                     if you've got any planes in the area of
                     Waynesville that are stationary.

LISA:               Um, probably not, but if you hold on I'll
                     let you talk to the "Supe."

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Thanks.

BILL:               Flight Control, Bill.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Hi, I'm a Warren County Police and Fire
                     dispatcher and we've got two unidentifiable
                     objects in the air, in the area of
                     Waynesville. Do you have two planes or any
                     planes that are stationary?

BILL:               Let's see here, just a second. (steps away
                     from phone to check either radar or other
                     records)

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Wright Pat is denying everything, they're
                     saying they don't have anything up there.
                     Like they're going to tell me, yeah right.
                     "This is a Stealth Bomber and we're going to
                     blow Corwin to blazes!"

BILL:               Ah, no. Right now we don't have any aircraft
                     over that way. We have them east of
                     Wilmington so we don't have anything over
                     that way.


WCCC Dispatcher #4: Dispatch, Lori?

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Did you guys call anybody about the UFO?

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Who's this?

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  State Patrol.

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Yes we did.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Who'd you call?

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Airborne and Wright-Pat.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  I mean like... UFO people?

WCCC Dispatcher #4: ...no.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  I'm embarrassed to call them.

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Robert Fisse (sp?) the Park Ranger just
                     called and said he can see them just fine.
                     He said they appeared to be a great distance
                     off but he could see them. He named the
                     colors he could see.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  Blue and green.

WCCC Dispatcher #4: And red and white.

O.S.P. Dispatcher:  I guess I better call somebody then. Oh
                     Lordy.

WCCC Dispatcher #4: All right. Bye.

SECTION 8: Further  Observation

Unit #2W30:         They just contacted O.S.P. I guess and
                     Wright Pat doesn't have anything in the
                     area. I don't know, this is weird.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    You got any tape on it?

Unit #2W30:         I don't even want to say. It's definitely
                     round. Did you copy that?

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    Yeah, we got it.

Unit #2W30:         (laughing) Hey, I'm just telling you!

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    Yeah, they're definitely not moving.

Unit #2W30:         Well, the one is now. It's moving farther
                     and farther away... well there it goes. It
                     just stopped again.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    I don't want to know.

Unit #2W30:         Okay.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    I was just up here at the office doing
                     paperwork and I had to check on it.

Unit #2W30:         No problem. I have 16-Robert-50 on local,
                     ah, Paul Rohrer (sp?) just spotted one right
                     above you. It's coming real close. (breaks
                     into laughter)

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    Okay wonderful. Ah, all I got's a plane
                     right up here that I can see.

Unit #2W30:         It's a plane and then it's... I don't know.
                     I don't know. I thought I'd let you know.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    I can still see the other two, but I don't
                     see any third one.

Unit #2W30:         This is actually coming from where you're
                     at.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    All right, I don't see that one. Ah, I
                     called the Com-Center on the phone and told
                     them that if they went outside they could
                     probably see it.

Unit #2W30:         Okay, are they seriously sending O.S.P. out
                     here?

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    I assume they are. O.S.P. has contacted
                     Wright Pat apparently. (NOTE: Incorrect,
                     WCCC contacted Wright Pat)

Unit #2W30:         Okay.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    They checked with them, I don't know if
                     they're actually going to have them come to
                     your location or what.

SECTION 9: Continued discussion

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Dispatch, Lori.

OSP DISPATCHER:     Hey Lori, this is Lori.

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Yep.

OSP DISPATCHER:     What's your latest update, are they still
                     there?

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Yeah, they're still there and they still
                     have a visual on it.

OSP DISPATCHER:     Damn! You know, I've called just about every
                     number I could find on UFOs but these
                     numbers are so damned old!

WCCC Dispatcher #4: Have you got a unit enroute up there?

OSP DISPATCHER:     Yeah, I have two.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Tell them to capture it, tell them to lasso
                     it and pull it down.

OSP DISPATCHER:     Well what they're going to do is to film it
                     so we can see it later.

WCCC Dispatcher #3: Okay.

OSP DISPATCHER:     Okay, bye.

LISA:               This is Lisa.

Unit #2W30:         Lisa...

LISA:               ...yes....

Unit #2W30:         ... this is Two-William-Thirty...

LISA                ...yes...

Unit #2W30:         ...what is going on?

LISA:               Well I don't know, you're out there looking
                     at it, what is it?

Unit #2W30:         Ahh... I couldn't tell you.

LISA:               Is there really something there though?

Unit #2W30:         I can tell you it's not a plane and it's not
                     a star.

LISA:               It's not a plane and it's not star...?

Unit #2W30:         No, it's round and it's got... wait a
                     second, O.S.P. is on the scene.

LISA:               Anything in the air.. I don't know if you
                     know this or not, but anything in the air or
                     falls from the air is State Patrol's
                     jurisdiction. Evidently you didn't know that
                     because we could hear your side traffic but
                     we had to tell that that's procedure.
                     Anything in the air or falls from the air is
                     State Patrol but that's... where are you at
                     where it you can see it? Is it like right
                     over you or...?

Unit #2W30:         No, it's in the distance toward Hamilton.

LISA:               Towards Hamilton?

Unit #2W30:         Yeah, O.S.P.'s here, I'll have to give you a
                     call back.

LISA:               Okay.


SECTION 10: WCCC dispatcher observes UFO north of her location

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Highway State Patrol, Dispatcher Hussman (sp?)

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Hey Kim...

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Yeah.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: What are they saying about that UFO?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  I don't know yet.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: I can see it from here. It's got a light
                     blue light, a yellow light and a red light
                     alternating, flashing on it and it looks
                     like it's in a line. If I step out... not
                     the door that we normally come in but that
                     other basement door... walk to the top of
                     the steps and look at (Route) 48, it's to
                     the left way up in the sky up like toward my
                     house... toward Waynesville.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  We're still trying to find phone numbers.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: For what?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  To get a hold of somebody.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: We've got the UFO numbers.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Tell me what you've got, because everything
                     we've got isn't any good.

        (Radio traffic from other police officers heard in
        background, they assure the object is not a plane
        and not a star)

OSP Dispatcher #2:  It's not a plane and it's not a star,
                     they're saying, and it's not moving.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: It didn't move when I was looking at it.
                     (calls out for Tonya to find UFO number)
                     Here it is, National UFO Reporting Center,
                     206-722-3000. That's in Seattle.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  That's who we're on the phone with and they
                     said if it's only one, it could be a Sirius
                     star.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: It's got a light blue, a yellow and a red
                     flashing light on it.

OSP Dispatcher #2   (Repeats to attendant in room to convey to
                     NUFORC): She said it's got a light blue, a
                     yellow and a red flashing light on it and
                     they're in a straight line.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Well, if it's like in a circle, I'm only
                     seeing... it's not the same light
                     alternating flash, it's in different
                     locations, like the light blue is in the
                     middle, the red flashes on the right and the
                     yellow flashes on the left of the light blue
                     light, and the light blue light stays
                     constant.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  The light blue light is in the middle.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Correct. And from where I'm looking at it,
                     the red is on the right and the yellow is on
                     the left, and they flash. The light blue
                     light flashes but it's almost like it's
                     flickering. The other one's you just see
                     alternately. Trying looking at it, it's
                     different! I mean they're not flashing, it's
                     not the same light changing colors, it's
                     like three different locations on a straight
                     line. Right on the same thing, you can tell
                     it's the same thing. And it doesn't look
                     like it's up as far as a star would be but
                     it's higher than a plane would be, and it's
                     stationary.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  [Laughter]

WCCC Dispatcher #5: What?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  We just talked to them at that national UFO
                     hotline?

WCCC Dispatcher #5  ...yeah?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  They just told her that last January several
                     departments in Illinois chased after a
                     triangular-shaped UFO for several miles...

WCCC Dispatcher #5: ... and then...?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  ...nothing.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: It disappeared?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  There's nothing they could do!

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Well what good are they? So we can't get
                     anybody to see if they can get this on radar
                     or anything?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Our guys are filming it.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Oh, they are?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  They're trying to.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Okay... well, I just wondered what your
                     status was with it.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  So far, that's it.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: So the UFO Center is thinking it is
                     possibly a Sirius star?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Yes.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: With those color lights?

OSP Dispatcher #2:  Yes.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: I don't think so, but okay.

OSP Dispatcher #2:  They said if it's one, it's a Sirius star,
                     but if there's two, it's not a Sirius star.

WCCC Dispatcher #5: Okay, bye.


SECTION 11: Final conversation

LOCAL:              William 30, Robert 50. There's also one to
                     the north.

Unit #2W30:         Okay, you see one now?

LOCAL:              Yeah, I see from our direction from you and
                     to the north a little bit.

Unit #2W30:         Yeah, that's the one I think we're looking
                     at and I have no clue what it is.

LOCAL:              Well at first I'd say it was just stars
                     through the atmosphere but the ones that are
                     lower than that doesn't look like those.

Unit #2W30:         No, from where we're at with the binoculars
                     that we got, this isn't a star, I can tell
                     you that much. And it's not a plane, I can
                     definitely rule out those two.

LOCAL:              Yeah, I've got some real small glasses up
                     here and can see all the colors but can't
                     make out any form.

Unit #2W30:         I'm calling Com-Center now and see what's going on.

LOCAL:              Okay, so what have you got? William 30,
                     Robert 50. William 30, Robert 50. William
                     30, Robert 50. What's he ending up with?

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    I think it's wishful thinking, I don't think
                     it's much. It's some sparkling lights, I
                     think it's a plane or something, but I don't
                     know.

LOCAL (laughing)    Okay, you're clear.

Unit #2W30:         16 to Robert-50, he just needed to get his
                     eyes re-examined because - like I said -
                     this isn't a plane and it's not a star.

LOCAL:              Yeah, I sat up here watching it for awhile
                     and if it's a plane it's not moving.

UNKNOWN OFFICER:    You guy's have been watching too many
                     X-Files movies.

Unit #2W30:         16 to Robert-50, do you still have a good
                     visual on it?

LOCAL:              I'm up by "4-3" now and I can't see anything
                     from up here. When I left the park over
                     there I could still see two of them, anyway.

Unit #2W30:         Okay.

LOCAL:              I'll leave them into your capable hands and
                     trust you'll keep it safe tonight. I'm going
                     "A.W."

Unit #2W30:         Okay, I'm going to leave this to The State,
                     to O.S.P. to handle, so I'm "A.W" also.

LOCAL:              You're clear.

Report and transcript prepared by Kenny Young
May 24, 2001
--
      U F O   R e s e a r c h
     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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                        Re: Serious Research - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:53:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:43:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:48:19 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000

 >>>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>>Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 00:30:50 EDT
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Hi Dick, Bob, All,

 >>'Opinion' ahead! Run for the hills!!! ;) Not all of this is
 >>being directed at you personally Bob. It's more of a general
 >>comment than 'Bob Young' specific. Although it does apply to you
 >>in many respects.

 >><snip>

 >>Dick Hall wrote:

 >>>>Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >>>>where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >>>>CUFOS-NICAP files.

 >>Bob responded:

 >>>Got any saucers there?

 >>UFOs represent a profound event in the history of mankind. There
 >>is enough 'hard' evidence for the existence of a 'real'
 >>phenomenon (whatever its origin) to convince even the hardest
 >>skeptic that there is a genuine mystery here. There are enough
 >>FOIA released -government documents- alone (aside from the
 >>aforementioned Bluebook and CUFOs files, etc.) to put to rest
 >>any doubts as to the existence of 'anomalous' craft(s) (genuine
 >>unknowns) operating in our collective air space.

 >>Only someone who has _unchangeably_ made up their mind about the
 >>nature of UFOs could question its validity as a real phenom and
 >>continually demand "proof."

 >>The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one thing,
 >>but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >>questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >>ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive
 >>(like having 500 lbs of lead in your pants while trying to climb
 >>Mt. Everest) to continue to indulge the ones who refuse to
 >>accept all the available evidence.

 >I agree with everything said up until that last paragraph, and
 >frankly, had to jump in for an opine or two. OK, OK, I lied.
 >Maybe three.

 >John Velez wrote:

 >>but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >>questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >>ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive

Hello All,

Mortellaro writes:

 >My dos centavos. Which these days is not worth much (the pennies
 >not the opinion, depending on who's reading of course) ...
 >
 >This forum is for everyone. I get really stressed out and
 >frustratingly angered whenever I read some of the small minded
 >(my opinion) points of view by some. But it is their right to
 >say it. Here or anywhere else. Most important of all _here_
 >because this list is not just for believers, it is not for
 >research either, strictly speaking.

When I posted this to the List I expected responses/reactions.
Instead (once again) I find I have to 'set the record straight'
so that the "interpretations" of "others" are not attributed to
me. The way it works is; one guy/gal misinterprets (or twists)
what is said. Then, the next response, (from a third party)
treats the 'misinterpretation' by the second person as if the
misinterpretation is what was intended by the poster of the
original. I have found that with certain folks it is a regular
occurrence. I have come to expect it, and I am 'almost' getting
used to writing these little 'disclaimer' responses.

For the record: (And in spite of Mr. Mortellaro's 'spin' on what
I said,...)

I did not (in my original) call into question anybody's "rights"
to post to the List. Anyone who bothered to read it (hopefully)
knows that I meant/intended no such thing.

Mr. M goes on,...

 >Otherwise, it would be better if Errol excluded anyone from this
 >list who was not a researcher, or one seeking information and
 >truth about what the hell happened to us.

I never called for (or even used the word) "exclusion" of anyone.

What I said was: Why does Dick Hall (or any number of others)
incessantly have to go over the same material every time a new
"show me" guy/gal shows up? It is an awful waste of time and an
imposition on the researchers who take the time to participate
on the List.

What I said was: I would rather pick Dick Halls brain and learn
from his decades long experience rather than watch him have to
answer (for the kazillionth time) the same ole "show me the
evidence for the existence of UFOs" question. It can't be very
much fun for him (or others) to have to cover the same real
estate over and over ad nausium.

Capiche? What I said has _nothing_ at all to do with either
denying anyone their "rights" to post, nor did I ask to
"exclude" anyone. Please, anyone responding to my original:

1. I have not asked to have anyone's "rights" taken away,...

2. I did not call for the "exclusion" of anyone.

Those are Mr Mortellaro's words (not mine.) And (once again) he
puts words into my mouth, and derives 'meanings' from my posts
that I did not utter or intend.

 >>If the available data is not enough to convince you that there
 >>is a real phenomenon involving craft of unknown origin and
 >>manufacture, then fine, just step aside while the rest try to
 >>move the discussion and the investigation of the subject another
 >>square or two on the board. At this stage in the proceedings,
 >>continually taking the time to debate (indulge) the "show me a
 >>cigarette lighter from a UFO" crowd is slowing any progress or
 >>inroads that can be made toward expanding our understanding of
 >>the phenomenon.

 >Also some truth in the philosophy, but not in the request to
 >"step aside." There is always the option of hitting that
 >"delete" button. Me personally??!? I prefer to hear every crumb
 >of information from every source, so that I can garner
 >something, even if only agida.

I already have agida from pointing people (and hearing others
point people) to the same material/information over and over
again. I just don't see what purpose is being served by posting
the same answers/responses to "what's the evidence for UFOs"
hundreds of times. If I want to chant a "mantra" over and over
I'll sit quietly and chant OM or Nam Myoho Renge Kyo, or
whatever, at least that way the endless repetition will benefit
me in some fashion.

Pointing people to the same material time and again only
prevents us from using our time in a more positive or
constructive way.

 >>I don't know about anybody else on the List but I came here to
 >>get information about UFOs and to participate in any discussions
 >>about their purpose or origin. Not to try to 'convince' anybody
 >>about the reality of it. We _waste_ almost half of the
 >>discussion time (bandwidth) of this List watching a seemingly
 >>endless debate where 'one side' is perpetually trying to
 >>convince the 'other side' that the phenomenon is real. It just
 >>seems to me that our collective time would be better spent
 >>trying to understand the events taking place rather than
 >>debating/educating those who remain on square one and still
 >>question its reality. When they 'catch up' and arrive at the
 >>point where they realize that we are dealing with a genuine
 >>mystery, they may then be able to contribute something of value
 >>to the ongoing discussion on this _UFO_ List.

<snip>

 >Sorry. But there is more to be learned from our enemies and
 >those who naysay us than not.

I don't see people who disagree with me as my "enemies." If that
is how you view folks that disagree with you then you have more
important 'personal issues' to deal with other than "UFOs."

 >And this ain't a closed list, just
 >for me or you or anyone. If these people, the naysayers, really
 >did believe that there is nothing to this phenom, then I trust
 >they would not be here.

Your "trust" is misplaced. Trust me! ;)

 >Has it ever occured that they too, are
 >seeking information from _US_? They too want to learn something?

I'm not taking about people who come here to "learn." I'm
talking about wasting time on people who have already
(unchangeably) made up their minds that there is nothing to any
of this UFO stuff. Who perpetually keep the discussion on
'square one'.

 >And who better to learn it from than us. We who have
 >experienced the crap for a lifetime.

Wrong! Very wrong!!!

How about objective researchers and investigators? If you want
to find out the current state of an investigation you don't go
to the victim.

You go to the detective.

I'm comfortable in the public arena because I can always point
people to Budd and a couple of others who have taken the time to
investigate my case and to check me out carefully. I don't
expect people to come to _me_ for information. The
'victim/witness' is the last person you want to ask about
matters of investigation. If on the other hand all you're
interested in are the details of the experiences, the shelves at
Barnes & Noble creak under the weight of (already) published
accounts.

Regardless of our lifetime of experiences we ain't no experts.
Nor should we be considered a good gage as to where the field is
at present. If you mean that people should come to us to learn
about the kind of experiences we are having, they are better off
reading the many fine books from people like Dave Jacobs, John
Mack, Budd Hopkins, and Ray Fowler, regarding cases they can
vouch for (and have thoroughly investigated.)

But then I'm not trying to sell any books, or myself as an
expert, so it isn't important to me to be viewed as a 'teacher'
or even as a good source of "abduction" information. I leave all
that crapolla to people with personal needs/agenda's of their
own. I don't want to be anybody's "Guru."  ;)

I ended up here because I was one of Budd Hopkins cases. Also
because I became so publicly visible due to my participation in
NOVA and other 'media' related venues. I never tout myself as an
"expert" nor do I encourage people to look upon me as a
"teacher" or a "typical example" of an abductee. There is no
such thing. I was "drafted" (by Budd, EBK, and others I hold in
high esteem) I didn't "volunteer" for this job. There is a
difference.

You seem to have a lot of mistaken ideas/concepts in your head
regarding the 'role' abductees play in the investigation of the
phenomenon and especially in the public arena.

It is important to have people behind you who can vouch for your
case, your character, your honesty, and integrity _before_ you
go out into a public venue and set yourself up as a 'source' of
information, or anything else for that matter.

 >Otherwise, I ain't got nuttin to debate.

You have an awful lot to say about what I "mean" whenever I post
though. I have to give you credit for consistency. You read me
wrong _every time_ without fail. It's uncanny!  <LOL>

The words/concepts, "deny rights", "exclude," or "enemies" (or
any other Mortellaro introduced distortions) are not mine folks.
Never said it, never meant it.  Just for the record.


John

"I didn't say dat I said dis" Velez ;)

                     "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                         integrity of your own mind."
                           www.spacelab.net/~jvif/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                           THE WATCHDOG - 05-24-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:34:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:12:57 -0400
Subject: THE WATCHDOG - 05-24-01


UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"
http://www.ufowatchdog.com

***NEWS***
~ The Alien In My Freezer
~ Reed Hoax Goes South of the Border To Sell UFO Con
~ New Face On Mars Pictures
~ New Crop Formations In Holland, Germany and England - Parts 1 & 2
~ Alien Bacteria
~ Unknown Force Pulls Distant Probes


To all THE WATCHDOG readers: Have a fantastic Memorial Day
Weekend! Be safe, stay alive, PLEASE don't drink and drive.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:03:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:30:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton


The following was recently posted to the 'UFO Skeptics' mailing
list, where Robert Sheaffer, who has written about the case,
kindly provided some information to follow up.

As the questions highlighted remain open to further
clarification, any specific answers would be appreciated:

[Begin] I noticed some discussions on UFO UpDates about a 'UFO'
incident being referred to as the 'Ravenna' case.

As I wasn't familiar with it, I've had a brief look at the
story, which I then recognised previously hearing about and knew
better as 'the cops who chased Venus for 80 miles' case.

A cursory examination of the evidence indicates that Venus might
have been responsible for the actual 'chase', however, the
object originally observed at close range was evidently
something else.

However, that's an assessment based on a lack of data and I
wondered if those who know the case material better might be
able to answer some questions.

For convenience, I am using two on-line sources as references,
namely, Richard Hall's summary, at:

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/portage.htm

and the newspaper reports at:

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/portage2.htm


Spaur claims that when the object was first observed, "The only
thing, the only sound in the whole area was a hum... like a
transformer being loaded or an overloaded transformer when it
changes...".

Did both witnesses claim this sound actually came from the
object, rather than just a noise somewhere in the general area?

It's claimed that, "According to Spaur, as the four officers
stood and watched the UFO, which had stopped and was hovering,
there was traffic on the radio about jets being scrambled to
chase the UFO, and '... we could see these planes coming in....
When they started talking about fighter planes, it was just as
if that thing head every word that was said; it went PSSSSSHHEW,
straight up; and I mean when it went up, friend, it didn't play
no games; it went straight up' (Transcript of taped interview
with Dale Spaur)".

By this time there were four officers involved, did they all
confirm that jets were observed, seemingly in pursuit of the
object?

Did all four confirm the object disappeared upwards at
'exceptional speed'?

Which base did these aircraft come from?

Presumably this resulted in major media attention and the USAF
were asked to explain their actions?

Hall states, "The Air Force 'identified' the UFO as a
satellite". How did the USAF rationalise sending aircraft to
intercept a satellite?

According to the 'Cleveland Plain Dealer' report, "Spaur said
the object began hovering and was "going for altitude, straight
up." After watching for about 20 minutes, he and the others went
inside the police station to telephone U.S. Air Force officials
he said, and when they came back outside the object was  gone".

It seems a completely different story from Spaur's claims that
aircraft were seen to intercept the object.

How is this explained?


Some of the object's reported characteristics resemble a blimp.
Nearby was Goodyear's Wingfoot Lake Airship Base at Akron. Did
anyone check to definitely rule out any possibility that a
Goodyear blimp might have been even partly involved?


I note that on 6 May 1999, Kenny Young wrote to UFO UpDates:

"Here are two articles regarding the '66 Portage Pursuit. The
first article makes brief mention of a mysterious automobile
which had a strange triangular emblem w/lightning bolt on the
side of the vehicle [filled with radio equipment] that was
accompanied by the written phrase: 'Seven Steps to Hell.'

And has anything similar been reported elsewhere?"

See:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/may/m16-004.shtml

The two articles Kenny mentions are those same newspaper reports
I've referred to.

In a reply, Jerome Clark explained:

"The allegedly mysterious automobile is part of the folklore of
the Portage County case, but it's no part of the factual aspect
of this crucial incident.

The only thorough investigation was conducted by Bill Weitzel
for NICAP.  Weitzel, who learned that the automobile's owner was
quickly traced, actually examined the vehicle himself while it
was still parked along 224. He wrote, "It had some tapes, a
cheap Japanese transistor toy tape recorder with a tape of
hillbilly music on it, some miscellaneous electrical gear, in
the back seat. Trunk full of old tires." The 'Seven Steps to
Hell' insignia was not on the car, only in witness Dale Spaur's
subsequent nightmares".

See:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/may/m17-013.shtml


When did Spaur first speak of this insignia?

Did he later admit it only existed in his dreams, or is that
purely conjecture, simply because Weitzel didn't note having
seen the same insignia?

Was Spaur's partner, Deputy Sheriff Neff ever asked about the
insignia and if so, what were his comments?

Did Neff ever claim, as Spaur apparently did, that he saw the
same 'flying saucer' again on another night?


The insignia was described in the newspaper report as follows:

"Spaur and Neff were checking on a car parked alongside U.S. 224
between Randolph and Atwater.  The car was filled with radio
equipment and had a strange emblem painted on its side, a
triangle with a bolt of lightning inside it.  Above the emblem
was written, 'Seven Steps to Hell'."

A triangle with what looks like a bolt of lightning inside and
the phrase, 'Seven Steps to Hell', both relate to a patch worn
by the 7th US Army.

The 'Seven Steps to Hell' are the 'steps' shown on a stylised
capital letter "A".

There's an example of the patch here:

http://www.rhoenline.de/wta/wta_gallery/winter_at_wta.htm

One comment relating to the patch states: "While stationed in
Kaiserslautern, Whaley served with the 596th Signal Support
Company, 97th Signal Battalion, 7th U.S. Army, as a Radio
Relay/Telephone and Teletype Carrier Operator. Spc-4 Whaley was
accompanied by many soldiers wearing the blue, gold, and red 7th
Army patch, also known as the Seven Steps to Hell".

As Spaur and Neff were checking on a car that was "filled with
radio equipment", then _if_ it contained an emblem and phrase
used by the 7th Army, which had battalions like the above, that
might put a different complexion on the 'UFO' story.


It's claimed that Weitzel, "learned that the automobile's owner
was quickly traced". Did Weitzel actually confirm this himself?
If so, who was the owner and why had the car been left there?

If the owner had been traced quickly, why was the car still
there when Weitzel arrived? How long after the incident did
Weitzel visit that location and how did he know for sure it was
the same car?

Presumably he didn't take a photograph of the car for NICAP's
files?


The presentation at:

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/portage.htm

has a link to, "Ravenna, Ohio, RECORD-COURIER Article, April 18,
1966". Unfortunately the link doesn't work.

Does anyone have a copy of that article they could please make
available?


Meantime, any answers to these basic questions would be
appreciated and we can perhaps clarify what seem to be some
striking evidential anomalies already.
[END]


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:17:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:33:37 -0400
Subject: Re:  Debunkers' Guidebook - Aldrich


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:29:36 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >><snip>

 >>>I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >>>that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >>>says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >>>been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >>>was in such an outfit.

 >>>Jan Aldrich

 >>Hi Jan,

 >>As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
 >>or ever existed.
 ><snip>

 >>Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
 >>program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
 >>doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
 >>program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
 >>from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
 >>program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
 >>in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

 >This makes no sense at all. Blue Book was not a TS Codeword
 >program. MJ-12 was purportedly set up by Truman to control _all_
 >UFO information, not just its own supposedly limited
 >jurisdiction (by your theory).

 >>For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
 >>clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
 >>dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
 >>clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
 >>systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
 >>the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
 >>medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
 >>people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
 >>people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

 >This again makes no sense. The MJ-12 Committee members were the
 >top purported _policymakers_ who had to have access to _all_
 >information in order to set UFO policy even if lower level
 >personnel were all compartmented. Menzel was an alleged member
 >of the MJ-12 Committee, not some lower level scientist
 >consultant as you seem to be treating him here.

 >>Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
 >>denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
 >>called basic information.
 >
 >No way, I don't buy it. Menzel did not just have purported
 >"MJ-12 clearance" but was himself allegedly a member of the
 >elite MJ-12 Committee.

 >>As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >>released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >>classified side to it.

 >This is untrue. We have plenty of information directly from BB
 >personnel who have been interviewed, BB's superiors whom I
 >interviewed (Gen. Garland, Col. Bower, et al.), Ruppelt's
 >papers, BB documents _not_ in the National Archives such as
 >those in Hynek's files, CIA, etc., NONE of which shows any
 >"highly classified" or TS Codeword type side to it.

 >>If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >>have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >>stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

 >That's not what the bogus Eisenhower Briefing Document says --
 >it says MJ-12 had "liason" (stupidly misspelled twice by the
 >hoaxer) with BB's head, _not_ a secretary or a lesser person
 >than the BB chief Ruppelt.

Thank, Brad, you really took words right out of my mouth.
Robert, I have the greatest respect for your opinions, but I
think here you are parsing words.

Blue Book was a low level effort with only a captain in charge
and no standing as far as codewords or compartmentalization
involved. Since we have people like Twining as MJ12 members, I
think it would be no problem to get documents for Menzel if that
was deemed important. MJ12 supposedly had the ear of the
president remember. Also, the Air Force is sending copies of UFO
reports to just about everyone except Donald Keyhoe. In fact,
Ruppelt was looking into making Secret reports available to
CSI-Los Angeles.


Jan Aldrich








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                   Re: Did You Make The List? - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:33:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:35:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Mortellaro


 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >I get the weirdest email sometimes! This came today. I don't
 >even know the guy who sent this to me. But since he gives
 >permission to pass it on, I thought I would do just that. This
 >is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. If you need
 >a good laugh, check this out!

Dear Bobie Felt... Felder... Felder, right, uh, and EBK and all;

There is only one reason - _only_one_ - why this person is
completely wrong.  The names of the most important men and women
in this business, are missing.

Where's Gesundt?
And Felder?
And Venus?
And what about them Mets?


Healthy Everygreen,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

               1968 Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects -

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:50:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:37:18 -0400
Subject: 1968 Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects -


I'm sure the following recent announcement by Jim Giglio, on
'UFO Skeptics', will be of interest:

The record of the 1968 _Symposium on Unidentified Flying
Objects_ (Roush Symposium), conducted by the US House of
Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics, has now
been placed in its permanent home. The URL is:

www.ncas.org/ufosymposium.html

on the web site of National Capital Area Skeptics. Some of the
testimony and paper submissions presented at the symposium
(mostly those of James E. McDonald) have been on the web for
some time. This is the first time the entire document has been
presented, and there is much material of interest provided by
the less prominent witnesses.
[END]


The endeavours of 'National Capital Area Skeptics' in making
this material available online is appreciated.

As an aside, I commented to Jim:

I noted with great interest the document mentions a little known
- completely unknown to me - aerial observation of a 'flying
saucer' formation by pilot Earl Page and his family, only some
three weeks after Arnold's founding sighting.

These 'six or eight silvery discs' are claimed to have travelled
at a perceived 'fantastic speed' and _exhibited similar
characteristics_ to Arnold's nine objects.

They reportedly, "fluttered as a group for a second or two, and
then stabilized... alternating between these two modes".

This is staggering new evidence to come across and has to be of
major significance. Like Arnold's objects, Page's formation of
'silvery discs' were observed to be repeatedly fluttering, as a
group, and then gliding.

Including Arnold, that's at least three pilot's sightings of a
formation of 'discs' in that period, although the one which
occurred on 10 July, in the same general area as Arnold's, was
of course resolved when the objects were 'disc'overed by Capt.
Gordon Moore and his co-pilot to be a formation of Pelicans.

They weren't, as first believed, "nine big round discs" at all.

Equally of interest is where Page's little-known encounter
occurred.

It was over Utah Lake, a location I became aware of during my
research into the Kenneth Arnold case.

Unless there's possibly another Utah Lake, the one I'm familiar
with is indeed home to formations of large, aerial objects which
fly with a distinctive fluttering and gliding characteristic...

[...]

[END]

No need to restate the obvious.

You can guess the rest, I'm sure.


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

              Re: Evidence First...Experience Or Disclosure? -

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 04:26:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:40:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Evidence First...Experience Or Disclosure? -


 >Date: 24 May 2001 08:22:57 -0700
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: skywatcher22@space.com
 >Subject: Evidence First - What Of Experience Or Disclosure?

 >Esteemed UFO Researchers,

 >There is an old saying that it only takes one white crow to
 >prove that not all crows are black.

<snip>

Hiya Bill, All,

Bill writes:

 >My point is that we need a protocol and a checklist for both
 >witnesses and verifying evidence. When such a protocol is
 >adhered to and a final report is given it should be passed on to
 >a review group to pass on it or not. Again, this is just a
 >suggestion and one that would involve cooperation and
 >collaboration among researchers.

Like "City Hall" your suggestion makes too much sense to ever
become a reality!  <LOL>

You are absolutely spot on however. Dick Hall has tried twice
(on this List) to garner interest/support for some kind of
unified effort on the part of participating researchers. To no
avail. Everybody knows what is needed, but few are doing
anything to make it happen. Ufologists need to arrive at some
kind of consensus as to the proper way to proceed, and to unify
in both effort and purpose. As it stands right now, as many
researchers as are involved, is the same number of diffrent
directions the research is running in. The effort/ evergy is
scattered to the four winds. As a result, progress is painfully
slow.

It's also easier for the wolves to pick off solitary prey.
Animals that run in large herds stand a greater chance of
survival and are better able to defend themselves. Banding
together to increase individual strength and chances is
nature's way.

 >Heck, by this time, we need an "Institute for UFO Studies" just
 >to elevate these studies to an academic level.

It's about time too! It doesn't even have to be formally
accredited. If enough solid people (PhD's and the like)
are involved it will stand of its own weight.

 >I also feel that we need volunteers who will take an active
 >approach to the UFO problem and seek to gather evidence by going
 >to UFO hot spots and making a thorough record of any ongoing
 >sighting or encounter via instruments and equipment that can be
 >audio, video, chart recordings for later examination and
 >evaluation. Even a mobile unit with racks of equipment would
 >help. How much $$ would it take? Would it pay off?

Hey Bill, Greer managed to get Larry Rockefeller to throw $$$ at
him and allow him to fly around in his private Lear jets. Talk
to Greer and find out what kind of a sales pitch he laid on old
Laroo or what kind of deals he made for it. <vbeg>

If not, maybe we can all chip in and buy an old ambulance (ala
Ghost Busters) and fix it up with all kinds of gadgets and
equipment. I know of an abandoned fire house we can use as head
quarters!  ;)

All kidding aside, I would contribute what $ I could to such a
thing. I'm certain many others would as well. Might be enough
after all is said and done to outfit your "UFO Busters" van!  ;)

 >I have attempted to urge as much participation as possible on my
 >own Skywatch list and have noticed more of a tendency for
 >passivity than activity. On this list I see many who seem to be
 >active, but all seem to operate more or less independently. So,
 >I for one, would like to see a trend toward more
 >collaboration...unless all the solo researchers out there think
 >they can handle this alone or go on thinking that the other
 >guy's views are made in the dark.

 >Stepping down from my soapbox now with these parting words... I
 >think you are all doing a good job and can really understand the
 >differing points of views, even from the curmudgeons.

Curmudgeons are fine Bill. The ones I have problems with are the
ones who have prejudged everything, and who _refuse_ to look at,
or acknowledge the existing body of reports and information.
Many of them tie up the discussions with their "it isn't real
because it can't be" BS.

I wish you luck in your efforts to get some kind of unity among
all these 'Lone Rangers.' You're on the right track cowboy. Keep
plugging away for it.


Regards to you and Mrs, H,

John Velez


                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:42:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:46:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Hatch


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 04:33:38 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:05:17 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:06:11 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >><snip>

 >>>So they knew it was bogus but wanted to document the nutball so
 >>>they could trumpet his crazy testimony to the detriment of
 >>>accurate witnesses who were shunted aside and left uncounted. So
 >>>that debunkers could forever after seize upon crackpot testimony
 >>>such as this as Exhibit A in the Case Against the UFO.

 >>Brad:

 >>It isn't enough that UFO proponents insist on generalizing about
 >>what is shown by the "unidentified" residue, while refusing to
 >>consider the implications of the IFOs, now "bogus" cases which
 >>turn out to be IFOs are not even to be considered an IFO?

 >>C'mon, Brad. How did this incident come to the attention of the
 >>Condon people if it wasn't a "UFO" report? The witnesses
 >>obviously didn't consider it "bogus", or they wouldn't have
 >>bothered to tell anybody.

<snip>

 >Had the witnesses stupidly described this as a "spacecraft" with
 >alien "occupants" (plural!!!) you can be sure the Condon
 >Committee debunkers would have seized on it - especially if they
 >could have backed up their lying boss Condon by doing so. Condon
 >was forced to lie his head off to make this his chief exhibit of
 >a UFO and lay the framework for ridicule of witnesses in general
 >- slandering them as so stupid and incompetent as to think a
 >3-foot dry cleaner's bag was a 75-foot spacecraft from outer
 >space - even though no one had said that. Condon had to
 >fabricate these phony crackpot claims and put them in the mouths
 >of the supposed "30" idiot witnesses who never said any such
 >things.

 >The case "came to the attention of the Condon people" because it
 >happened in their backyard so to speak and everyone knew about
 >the Project and where to call.

 >>Clear skies,

 >>Bob Young

 >Clear answers,

 >Brad Sparks


Hello Brad

Once again:

One crackpot negates a hundred credible witnesses. One screamer
neutralizes a hundred honest researchers. One fridge chills a
hundred good beers. [burp]

( all figures rhetorical )


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

              2001 Mars Face Ends Speculation, Invites Inquiry

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 02:36:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:50:46 -0400
Subject: 2001 Mars Face Ends Speculation, Invites Inquiry


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

The Electric Warrior : Mars Online May 25, 2001
http://www.electricwarrior.com/mol/

------------------------------------------------------------
2001 MARS FACE ENDS SPECULATION, INVITES INQUIRY
by The Electric Warrior

http://www.electricwarrior.com/mol/2001MarsFaceThumb.jpg

NASA has released a new high resolution photograph of the
enigmatic Face on Mars. The new image was captured early last
month, in response to a legal demand by a space exploration
activist group called FACETS (Formal Action Committee for
Extra-Terrestrial Studies).

According to a letter from Dr. Edward J. Weiler, the space
agency's Associate Administrator for Space Science, NASA
responded to the FACETS request by ensuring that the highest
possible resolution images of the Cydonia "face" feature were
acquired.

"The newly released Cydonia observations reveal an intriguing
mesa-like feature not unlike those found in the Southwestern
USA, with geologic features than can be attributed to processes
in multiple places on Mars," wrote Weiler.

In a March 16 letter to NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin,
FACETS attorney Peter Gersten wrote, "About a dozen features in
an area known as Cydonia, after an independent analysis, were
considered artificial by some respected scientists." Gersten was
retained by the group last summer, when FACETS undertook an
online petition campaign to re-image Cydonia.

The official response letter to FACETS said that NASA welcomes a
variety of opinions about the origin of the enigmatic features
on Mars, but also  flatly stated, "At present the Scientific
advisory committees that formally advise NASA have not
interpreted the Cydonia feature as evidence of extraterrestrial
intelligence."

The Associated Press agreed with Weiler, in a caption
distributed with NASA's new Mars Face image, "This new picture,
taken by a camera aboard the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft on
April 8, 2001, shows the area in far sharper detail, but reduces
any resemblance to a humanlike extraterrestrial."

Earlier this year NASA approved an extended mission for MGS,
which began on February 1 and is scheduled to run through April
2002. According to Malin Space Science Systems, which designed
and operates the Mars Orbital Camera (MOC) for NASA, the image
was captured on the first opportunity to turn the spacecraft and
point the MOC at the popular Face on Mars feature.

Until now, the eastern side of the Martian landform had never
been adequately imaged by either MGS or Viking missions, having
been either obscured from view or unresolved in deep shadow. A
clear shot of the eastern half was considered crucial in order
to determine whether the Face is symmetrical.

Championing the artificiality hypothesis, Richard Hoagland's
Enterprise Mission Web site recently stated, "Without a clear
shot of the Eastern half, or even a lower resolution image of
the entire Face from a full overhead view, this issue will never
be settled in the minds of most observers."

According to FACETS founder and director, David Jinks,
speculations about what this side of the Face might contain are
now resolved. "The image clearly shows a slumping, largely
amorphous eastern half, which is devoid of most detail we
suspected we might see there."

Jinks says FACETS' main purpose is to have the subject of
extraterrestrial life, whether in the form of microbes or super-
intelligent beings, taken seriously in the court of science. He
feels that FACETS succeeded in forcing the space agency to set
aside its biases, and gather observational evidence. "My goal in
forming FACETS was to get more data. We have gotten it."

------------------------------------------------------------
RELATED RESOURCES

Highest-Resolution View of "Face on Mars"
http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/extended_may2001/face/index.html

The Formal Action Committee for Extra-Terrestrial Studies (FACETS)
http://www.infosourceresearch.com/

Face it -- It is a Face
http://www.enterprisemission.com/about.htm

Unmasking the Face on Mars
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast24may_1.htm?list126396

------------------------------------------------------------
THE ELECTRIC WARRIOR
May 25, 2001
Silicon Valley, CA
http://www.electricwarrior.com

------------------------------------------------------------
Web developers, the URL address for this content is:
http://www.electricwarrior.com/mol/MarsOnline00B.htm

Permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
article or any portion thereof, provided The Electric
Warrior is cited as the source.

Images are created exclusively for the Electric Warrior
Website. They can be downloaded and cached for individual
use, but may not be reproduced or used in any other context
without permission.

eWarrior@electricwarrior.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                     Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 03:56:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 22:00:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch


 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >I get the weirdest email sometimes! This came today. I don't
 >even know the guy who sent this to me. But since he gives
 >permission to pass it on, I thought I would do just that. This
 >is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. If you need
 >a good laugh, check this out!

 >___________________________________________

 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 03:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: B upton <ufobuzz@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Baktar
 >To: jilain@ebicom.net

 >The Good, The Bad & The Ugly in Ufology

 >A New Version Featuring the Insights of Baktar Summary May 24,
 >2001

 >copyright (c) Friends of Baktar 2001

 >"Everyone is fair and right to have their own reactions and
 >their own emotions and their own opinions. This is the point of
 >the list - to help people become more discerning and more
 >trusting of their own emotions, their own reality, and not so
 >much leaning on somebody else's reality."  - Baktar

 >The opinions and information that follow are those of a
 >channeled extraterrestrial named Baktar. They are his
 >perceptions as filtered through the perceptions of a human
 >channel, and as such, they may or may not be accurate. It is
 >the privilege and the responsibility of each individual to make
 >their own determination about what they choose to believe.

 >The Good

 >Promotes the truth

 >DAVID ADAIR He is a genius who did and who knows the remarkable
 >things he claims. He will blow the lid off things when he
 >thinks he can get away with it. He has been threatened a great
 >deal.

 >GILLIAN ANDERSON Unlike her Agent Scully character in X-Files,
 >she is not only a believer but also a contactee. She will be
 >using regression and other means to remember her contacts.

<snip>

Hello Bobbie:

I got that same BS maybe 2-3 weeks ago.

The Insights of Baktar sound like some channeled or contactee
revelations about various figures in ufology. His choice of who
is good, bad or otherwise speaks for itself.

"Baktar" seems to surf the Updates archives for
email addresses to spam. Nothing new.


Best!

- Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 25

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:13:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 22:04:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:55:26 -0700


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:46:32 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:15:33 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

Morning all -

 >>>My position isn't that the issues over rank and command aren't
 >>>important but that there seems to be some confusion about
 >>>whether they were lies or whether he was confused or mistaken. I
 >>>know he felt entitled to the rank of full Col. Why is there
 >>>confusion over this? I don't know.

 >>Well, I feel that I am entitled to be a general, so I'll just
 >>adopt that rank from here on in. Nope. This doesn't wash.

 >All I'm saying is that Col. Corso said he was a full Col.
 >(retired) His son says he was a full Col.

And the record does not support this claim by Corso. That his
son believes it has no relevance.

 >I'm trying to get more information on this.

 >I can't answer why this confusion exists but it's hard for me to
 >understand why Col. Corso would feel the need to inflate his
 >rank when he knew he would be under scrutiny. I'm confused, too;

The confusion exists because Corso said that he was promoted to
full colonel in the reserve and the record shows that this
statement is untrue. If Corso had said that he was a Lt. Col.,
there would be no confusion.

 >but I know that Col Corso is who he says he is so it's hard for
 >me to make such a big deal out of something that might have
 >another explanation. What you, Greg, Robert and Bob, and now
 >Richard and Jerry don't understand is Col. Corso's history and
 >the subtle meanderings of his life. I don't know everything
 >either, but the way you're approaching this evdence is just
 >another reminder that deep in the heart and soul of every ufo
 >researcher is a pelican's shadow.

But the record shows that Corso was not who he said he was. He
was not a member of the NSC as he said he was. He was not a
member of MJ-12, as he said he was. Yeah, I know what you'll say
here. He never made that claim. But he said in one version of
the proposal for his book that he was a member of MJ-12... a
claim that was dropped from the book.

And, there is a real question about his military career. Why was
he a major in 1945 and retired as a Lt. Col. in what, 1962 or
1963. Why wasn't he promoted faster? Why didn't he make full
colonel. That suggests a problem with his performance of his
duties and suggests that the FBI take on him is correct.

 >>Nope, they've lied on multiple occasions. Santilli said that the
 >>tent footage was a hoax.

 >Santilli had nothing to do with the tent footage.

Of course he did. He was the one who provided it to a number of
different TV producers. He was the one who suggested it was of
the preliminary autopsy in a barn on the crash site and then,
when Philip Mantle proved it to be a hoax, dropped it like a hot
potato.

 >He dropped it
 >as soon as he realized that there were problems. Have you viewed
 >the tent footage? Ray said it was a hoax played on him; not that
 >he perpetrated it.

Of course I have seen it. Ray only came clean after that ship
had sailed (note the nautical reference here... I really should
get back to the book about the sinking of a ship. Did any of you
know that many of the passengers saved in Life Boat No. 12 were
teenagers? Sorry, back to the main thread now.)

 >>He changed the cameraman's statement
 >>after it was pointed out that it was not an American "voice,"

 >I'm not aware of this. Could you provide proof. I've heard these
 >rumors before but haven't seen any evidence. I would appreciate
 >knowing more about this. You can write me off line.

Don Ecker and Bob Shell had this discussion a couple of years
ago. Shell claimed that the transcript of the cameraman's
statement was an accurate transcript. When Ecker, among others,
pointed to statements that were clearly British (joined the
"Forces" as the British would say as opposed to joined the
"Army" or "military" as an American would say, as a single
example), Santilli claimed that the problem was the typist, who
apparently translated the American expressions into British.
Please note here that the transcript came from Santilli
originally, and a copy was sent to Bob Shell.

 >>had those crazy security classifications that he showed until
 >>those with the knowledge said such classifications never
 >>existed... and so on. Not one lie but multiple lies.

 >The above statement is not correct. The security classifications
 >were part of the hoaxed tent footage and Ray may have alluded to
 >them but he didn't understand their importance. I believe the
 >classification information was taken from the box or film label
 >that was with the film Ray sent to the "tent" hoaxers. He had
 >asked the hoaxers to see what they could get from some of the
 >film that was severely damaged. The classifications were not
 >necessarily bogus and I've written to both you and Stan about
 >this fact. Do you remember? It had to do with "restricted" as a
 >classification.

So part of the package put together by Santilli, which
originally included the tent footage is a hoax, but the rest of
it is real.

 >>Neither Santilli nor Corso have anything to contribute. I have
 >>looked at all of this carefully. Don't you think I would want it
 >>to be true because it would verify my statements that something
 >>extraterrestrial crashed at Roswell. However, I have examined
 >>these statements carefully and when I find problems, I'm going
 >>to point them out. I'm not going to allow these people to insult
 >>my intelligence by climbing on their bandwagons.

 >I certainly don't agree with that. You've not answered the M.
 >Dennis article, nor the striking resemblance between the Ft
 >Worth Roswell photos and the debris in the AA.

Okay, but you won't like the answer. The Fort Worth pictures
show the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target and not
pieces of a flying saucer. Any images seen in this wreckage are
so many faces in the clouds.

And, I find it difficult to believe that when looking at alien
symbols, we would find an English word in them. One of the
I-beams in the footage has the word video on it. What are the
chances that a video tape of alien debris would contain the word
video on it?

 >You have not ordered the AA CDs to take a look, for yourself, at our
 >evidence.  You haven't rebutted the Corso VSA. You have
 >investigated Col. Corso's background, but only superficially.

Don't have tto rebut the VSA because we have caught Corso
in other lies and misrepresentations.

 >You haven't said one word about the subject of this thread:
 >Corso's FBI Files, revisited. You and the ther Corso/AA
 >debunkers have the same attitude: the AA and Corso can't be
 >true; therefore it must not be true. You're all going to look
 >pretty foolish sometime down the line.

I think I joined this thread (against my better judgement) to
support a statement made by Greg Sandow that I found
interesting.

My attitude is not that it can't be true, but that there has
been no evidence for it being true (less, of course, your VSA).
Corso was less than honest on a number of occasions, even when
the truth would not have hurt him. His version of the events in
Roswell do not match the testimony of others and his tale of
seeing the body at Ft. Riley makes no sense in the real world of
security and secrecy.

Foolish or not, if Corso is proven to be telling the truth, then
I will leap on the bandwagon and apologize for all the mean
things I said. I will not, however, hold my breath.

 >>More to the point, Corso has no proof that they are true. We're
 >>just supposed to believe them because he said so.

 >That was his big mistake. He thought because of his former
 >status, and the letter from Strom that folks would believe him.

And believe him we would, had there been any evidence to back up
his claims. He failed to produce any of it and the little
documentation we found did not support what he said.

 >He was wrong. But we do have scientific proof that he wasn't
 >being deceptive, Mike's VSA. VSA is a scientific tool and all
 >investigators should have one in their tool kit.

If the VSA is 100% accurate, then it is being used by courts to
determine the truthfulness of witnesses and defendants in trial.
If not, why not? And, even if completely accurate, it only
proves that the person telling the story believes it to be true,
not that it is true. The investigation must be made up of more
than a single test.

 > I wouldn't think of using witness testimony if they refused
 >a VSA. But if  they pass, then we have a very good notion
 >they they're telling the truth. Mike didn't know that Dennis
 >was a known liar. He listened to the tape and then told me
 >that his testimony could not be trusted.

 >>McCarthy implies this, but then he has no proof. He claims that
 >>both Schmitt and I admitted that we had fabricated the missing
 >>nurse story, but McCarthy is mistaken. I never said any such a
 >>thing. Should we reject Schmitt? Yes. But not just because
 >>McCarthy said so. Should we reject me, because McCarthy said so?
 >>No. Not without proof.

 >Should we reject all that Corso says simply because you and
 >others have called him a liar? He has passed a VSA on these
 >questions. Explain that before you start supposing this and
 >that. You all need to take another look at the Corso
 >information.

No, I am suggesting that we reject Corso because many of the
things he said were not proven in the documentation. The only
conclusion to be drawn here is that Corso was not telling the
truth.

 >Yes his stories sound improbable; his whole life is improbable,
 >but when you look closely, you find that it's true.

 >>>You have no proof that this didn't happen. It seems far fetched
 >>>but we're dealing with aliens. Anything is possible, even time
 >>>travel.

 >>More to the point, you have no proof that it did.

 >I do have evidence, the VSA. He's telling the truth.
 >You should listen.

A single bit of evidence that is open to interpretation. It does
not negate all the other evidence aligned against Corso.

 >>Sorry, but it is true. I've read Birnes on the subject. Have you
 >>ad Pflock, who talked to the senator's staff?

 >I wouldn't believe anything that Pflock says.

So you'll just reject, out of hand, all of this evidence, even
when Pflock can supply copies of the letters showing the chain
of evidence? Pflock has the documentation, but more to the
point, Thurmond's office demanded that new copies of the book,
and the paperback be issued without the introduction. Sounds to
me like the evidence supports Pflock's version and not the spin
put on it by others.

 >Ask him if
 >he'll do an interview with me that I can tape and put through VSA.

Why? The documentation exists to prove the point.


 >>Sorry, but I did announce to the UFO community, on more than one
 >>occasion, that I found the Glenn Dennis testimony to be bogus. I
 >>point to The Roswell Encyclopedia (Quill, 2000), pages 94-99 and
 >>The Randle Report (M. Evans, 1997) pages 186-192. So I have been
 >>quite vocal about the Dennis testimony and how we all were duped
 >>by him, me maybe more so than others.

 >I wasn't aware of that. Sorry! I'm glad we have that straight.
 >It's good to have these frank discussions.

Thank you.

 >So how many digits did the Roswell alien have? What's you're
 >latest thinking on this?

Certainly not six.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:20:36 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:36:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:13:04 EDT
 >Subject: Serious Research
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:08:08 -0000
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall

 >>>Incidentally, I had direct communications from a scientist of
 >>>the Kuwait scientific organization (ca't recall its name right
 >>>now). Iraqui aircraft landing in a Kuwait oil field?

 >>>Hell, two years later they captured the lot in a few hours.

 >>Bob,

 >>The meaning and logic of this statement totally elude me. How
 >>reasonable is it that an Iraqui aircraft landed in a Kuwaiti oil
 >>field (just as the electricity "coincidentally" failed) and then
 >>took off again without being recognized for what it was?

 >Are the identities of the eyewitnesses known?

My primary information source was P.G. Jacob of the Kuwait
Institute for Scientific Research, which conducted a classified
investigation of the incident. The witnesses were technical
staff of the KOC Gathering Centre.

 >Let's see, now, can we rank the possible causes of an incident
 >such as this? Which is more likely?

 >1. A spook aircraft from Iraq, two years before a war, perhaps
 >testing out Kuwaiti response (or whether their radar even
 >worked) when power was down;

 >2. An aircraft from Kuwait, checking out the reason for an
 >electrical blackout, or;

 >3. A flying saucer from another world filled with little grey
 >ETs sucking the electicity.

In any given case, it could be any of these things--depending on
what the eye-witness testimony supports or fails to support; not
what is a priori "more likely." The testimony in this one case
supports none of your three choices; it does support (literally)
a "UFO."

 >Another UFOlogical Tale of Two Cities.

Whatever that means.

 >Regarding the Coyne helo incident UFO being a meteor, I had
 >said,

 >>>Sound[s] like one to me, and I've seen a bundle of them,
 >>>including brilliant green bolides.

 >>You've seen a fireball approach a helicopter, hover above it
 >>long enough for ground witnesses to see it approach, stop their
 >>car, and get out and watch as the two hovered near each other?
 >>Wow! I envy you!

 >>These ground "witnesses" surfaced three years later after
 >>>newspaper publicity describing the sighting. According to Phil
 >>>Klass, they placed the UFO miles away from the helo.

 >>"According to Phil Klass?" You ignore Jennie Zeidman's
 >>meticulous investigation and reconstruction of the case ("A
 >>helicopter-UFO Encounter Over Ohio," Center for UFO Studies,
 >>1979, 122 pgs.) and accept Klass's erroneous remarks based on
 >>armchair debunking? Shame on you! What does it matter that the
 >>witnesses were not found immediately? The UFO and helicopter
 >>were placed in close proximity, not "miles away."

 >>Unlike Klass, Jennie actually interviewed the witnesses for two
 >>hours at the site.

 >Unlike Ziedman, who spoke to these people three years later,
 >Klass cited an appearance by Coyne on national television (the
 >Dick Cavitt Show) describing the incident as lasting less than a
 >minute, a couple weeks after the incident.

One is an offhand comment (if accurate in the first place), the
other a meticulous reconstruction of the case based on thorough
investigation. I guess you choose offhand comments if they
support your position. Have you read the Zeidman report? It is
readily available in many places.

Also, I suspect you are confusing a comment about how long the
object was engaged with the helicopter, not counting how long it
had been visible before that, or after that.

 >She reconstructs a timeline of what they saw, first from their
 >moving car and then after they stopped and got out. They saw two
 >sets of lighted objects converge. The second steady-lighted
 >object approached what was now recognizable as a helicopter and
 >stopped over it.

 >A reconstructed "time-line" three years later which directly
 >conflincts with the testimony of the witnesses immediately after
 >and then shortly later can only be an excercise in fantasy.

"Testimony?" I see. Investigations don't count. They are only
dealing with fantasy exercises. Hmmm! By your own standards of
immediacy, Coyne also reported to his superiors and the news
media the next day that the object had a "dark hull," body
lights, and a dome, and that a green spotlight swivelled around
and beamed down into the helicopter.


 >>And I repeat; show me any objective evidence that it was a
 >>fireball. The ones that are not seen are clearly irrelvant.

 >I agree. However, your claim was that because it wasn't reported
 >by anyone else, it couldn't exist.

 >>This one (if that's what it was) clearly was seen and should have
 >>been seen over a wide area. I am betting that you can't find an
 >>American Meteor Society (or other meteor observer net) fireball
 >>report for that date, time, location.

 >I'd be willing to make a bet, too, if I already knew what the
 >cards were going to show.

 >Since you didn't cite Philip Klass for any of your cases, I
 >wonder if you read the chapters of his books on his
 >investigation. It is, to date, the principal skeptical
 >investigation of this incident. If you had, you would know that
 >he had checked with the AMS and they had not received any
 >reports for this time and place, and I'm sure that you would
 >have cited him.

You mean Phil Klass's non-investigation?

 >There are now several organizations which collect reports like
 >this, but in 1973 the AMS and the Smithsonian Astrophysical
 >Observatory's Scientific Events Network were about it, and
 >scattered observers for the Association of Lunar & Planetary
 >Observers. Still, even now, few fireballs are actually reported,
 >whether they are visible or not.

For a meteor watcher, this is a strangely inaccurate statement.
Fireballs are reported all the time. My files are bulging with
reports from the last few years. As it turns out, I do have the
AMS fireball list for 1973 in my file (I had quite candidly
forgotten that), and it shows no fireball on or near the date in
quesation. However, it includes something like 125-150 for the
year and about 20 for the month of October, most around the
Orionids shower.

 >>I'll even accept a newspaper report of a fireball at that time and
 >>place. That would give me pause and cause me to reconsider
 >>your hypothesis.

 >A safe bet for you, in any case.

Bottom line: No evidence of a fireball except for your personal,
strained, counter-to-fact attempt to create one out of whole
cloth.

- Dick







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: Talk And Action - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:38:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000

 >Bless Jim, but here's the proverbial rub. Like most of ufology,
 >99.9% of his data was in anecdotal form. There is little that a
 >scientific investigation of, say, the Father Gill case can do
 >after the fact, except to say, "interesting, if true."

Dennis,

Jim McDonald proved what you are saying here to be untrue. By
vigorous investigation he was able to pin down a lot of facts,
check weather conditions, stars and planets, etc., in many
important cases. He searched out additional witnesses and
conducted careful interrogations. Good scientific work.

I know, it doesn't prove ET. But it does prove that we have a
consistent and patterned unexplained phenomenon.

 >Now, let me backtrack. Actually, the world grows more
 >electronically wired every day in ways that should let us
 >monitor UFO activity as it happens -- assuming the numbers some
 >ufologists promulgate. Weather radar, commercial "spy"
 >satellites, and so on. Theoretically, UFO sightings should be
 >greatly on the increase as a consequence. There are two other
 >consequences that need considering in this vein, too. One, as
 >the world continues to be increasingly surveilled in all sorts
 >of spectra, electromagnetic, visual, etc., the less the power
 >any imagined cover up entity could conceivably wield. Two,
 >science should be arguably logging this data on their own, w/o
 >any reference to present day ufology or UFO wars of the past.
 >There is no particular indication that this is happening.

Ah, but there is! I think we've been around this block before,
but your clear position statement allows pertinent comment. You
seem to believe (rather naively, in my opinion) that if
scientific instruments, FAA radar, etc. were picking up UFOs
regularly or even sporadically that the sighters would routinely
make public reports on same. It just doesn't happen that way.
The fear of ridicule by colleagues is a powerful force for
information suppression.

Speculation on my part? Not exactly. Ask anyone who has
investigated UFOs for a long period of time, and they will tell
you of their personal knowledge of many such suppressed cases. I
recall that within the past year or so, several such cases have
been reported belatedly in the MUFON UFO Journal, typically
anonymously by request, but I'm sure Dwight isn't making them
up.

Nor is "science" so monolithic. In the case of UFOs, many
scientists and technicians are more like scared rabbits worried
about their livelihoods, which we can't blame them for given the
proclivities of their scoffing colleagues who don't bother to
study the data. "Science" doesn't sit around monitoring the
skies for UFOs (unless there is a secret Government project
doing that), and when something anomalous occurs, the "safe"
path is to assume that it is an observational error of some sort
and to trash the data. This is exactly what was done with
anomalous observations by Project Moonwatch years ago, as one
example.

 >Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
 >science would just come over here and take an honest look at
 >what we've got, things would change. This totally ignores the
 >fact that science _should_ be detecting this stuff on its own,
 >coming to us, and asking, "wow, look what we got here! Got
 >anything like that in your database?" Again, _if_ UFO events
 >were as common and profligate as much of ufology insists they
 >are.

Count me "provincial" and in complete disagreement with your
idealistic view of "open-minded," freely communicating
scientists.

 >That science isn't, is some sort of an answer in itself, whether
 >one agrees with it or not. Most ufologists don't -- and won't.

 >Just as most ufologists will never sanction a Congressional or
 >scientific investigation of the UFO data -- _unless it arrives
 >at the conclusions they've already reached_.

"Most ufologists." Department of arbitrarily generated
statistics? Most ufologists of my acquaintance would cheerfully
support an open, honest, thoroughgoing scientific investigation,
which has never happened and may never happen.

 >I do not want to be seen as a debunker of the UFO data, such as
 >it is, else I wouldn't be here. At the same time, to the extent
 >that I have a public presence, I am not about to make or endorse
 >statements ("alien bodies were recovered at Roswell... the
 >Secretary General of the UN has been abducted") that I cannot in
 >good conscience support with cold, hard scientific evidence.

Nor am I.

 >Pawn to K4?


P-K4, Dick








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: Serious Research - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:07:20 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:39:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Hall


 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:53:19 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:48:19 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hello All,

 >Mortellaro writes:

 >>My dos centavos. Which these days is not worth much (the pennies
 >>not the opinion, depending on who's reading of course) ...

 >>This forum is for everyone. I get really stressed out and
 >>frustratingly angered whenever I read some of the small minded
 >>(my opinion) points of view by some. But it is their right to
 >>say it. Here or anywhere else. Most important of all _here_
 >>because this list is not just for believers, it is not for
 >>research either, strictly speaking.

 >When I posted this to the List I expected responses/reactions.
 >Instead (once again) I find I have to 'set the record straight'
 >so that the "interpretations" of "others" are not attributed to
 >me. The way it works is; one guy/gal misinterprets (or twists)
 >what is said. Then, the next response, (from a third party)
 >treats the 'misinterpretation' by the second person as if the
 >misinterpretation is what was intended by the poster of the
 >original. I have found that with certain folks it is a regular
 >occurrence. I have come to expect it, and I am 'almost' getting
 >used to writing these little 'disclaimer' responses.

 >For the record: (And in spite of Mr. Mortellaro's 'spin' on what
 >I said,...)

 >I did not (in my original) call into question anybody's "rights"
 >to post to the List. Anyone who bothered to read it (hopefully)
 >knows that I meant/intended no such thing.

 >Mr. M goes on,...

 >>Otherwise, it would be better if Errol excluded anyone from this
 >>list who was not a researcher, or one seeking information and
 >>truth about what the hell happened to us.

 >I never called for (or even used the word) "exclusion" of anyone.

 >What I said was: Why does Dick Hall (or any number of others)
 >incessantly have to go over the same material every time a new
 >"show me" guy/gal shows up? It is an awful waste of time and an
 >imposition on the researchers who take the time to participate
 >on the List.

John,

I do it by choice, and even stated my rationale. It exposes the
thought processes, logic, reason, of both the debunkers and the
advocates in a comparative way, which I think is instructive. If
it wastes your time, don't read it. I skip lots of stuff that
doesn't interest me. But various people are on this list for
different reasons from yours or mine, and as you say, they are
entitled.

 >What I said was: I would rather pick Dick Halls brain and learn
 >from his decades long experience rather than watch him have to
 >answer (for the kazillionth time) the same ole "show me the
 >evidence for the existence of UFOs" question. It can't be very
 >much fun for him (or others) to have to cover the same real
 >estate over and over ad nausium.

Feel free to pick, as long as you use sterilized alien probes. I
will try to respond as time permits. I feel under no compulsion
to debate with Bob Young; in fact, I initiated the challenge to
skeptics and he took me up on it. I am rather enjoying it.

I made myself available on the list hoping to do something
constructive toward focusing the issues and helping to encourage
more civil discussion and debate. These are important matters in
themselves. It has also been a learning experience for me. A
number of people have sent me nice private communications
thanking me for participating, and I appreciate that.


- Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:42:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Rudiak


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:34:21 EDT
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

 >>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:00:19 EDT
 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >To our knowledge there was no codeword access controls on
 >Bluebook. If such a liason existed, the person doing the liason
 >would have to hold a clearance compatabile with that group
 >(MJ-12) or organization. Just because they had such a clearance
 >and or sat in on meetings doesn't mean that they could wholesale
 >transfer files and documents that were properly AF classified to
 >an outside group or organization.

 >The point being is just because Bluebook was a very public
 >program does not preclude the possibility that a highly
 >classified program was also doing UFO work and working along
 >with and or using Bluebook.

 >I would point out (just about the time the wolves are howling)
 >that I am not saying that MJ-12 is real or that the EBD is real.

Robert -- excellent post.

Bluebook head Ed Ruppelt did allude to a parallel
highly-secretive UFO investigative group or groups several times
in his tattle-tale insider book.

E.g., in Chapter 3 ("The Classics"), Ruppelt talks about the
infamous, top-secret Estimate of the Situation that Gen.
Vandenberg rejected, leading to the eventual demise of Project
Sign and Sign's interplanetary hypothesis. At the end of the
chapter Ruppelt wrote:

    "By the end of 1948, Project Sign had received several
    hundred UFO reports.... Even though the UFO reports were
    getting better and more numerous, the enthusiasm over the
    interplanetary idea was cooling off.... More and more work
    was being pushed off onto the OTHER INVESTIGATIVE
    ORGANIZATION that was helping ATIC..."

Hmmmmm......

Moving forward to Chapter 8 on the Lubbock Lights, Ruppelt wrote
toward chapter's end:

    "The only other people outside Project Blue Book who have
    studied the complete case of the Lubbock Lights were A GROUP
    WHO, DUE TO THEIR ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE GOVERNMENT, HAD
    COMPLETE ACCESS TO OUR FILES. And these people were not pulp
    writers or wide-eyed fanatics, THEY WERE SCIENTISTS, ROCKET
    EXPERTS, NUCLEAR PHYSICISTS, AND INTELLIGENCE EXPERTS. They
    had banded together to study our UFO reports because they
    were convinced that some of the UFO's that were being
    reported were interplanetary spacships and the Lubbock series
    was one of these reports...."

Who were these "scientists, rocket experts, nuclear physicists,
and intelligence experts" with "complete access to our files?"
That sounds like the description of an MJ-12 type organization
if I ever heard one.

Here's the beginning of Chapter 12 on the Washington DC
radar/visuals of 1952:

"A few days prior to the incident, A SCIENTIST, FROM AN AGENCY
THAT I CAN'T NAME, and I were talking about the build-up of
reports along the east coast of the United States. From his
study of the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force
Headquarters, and from discussions with his colleages, he said
he though that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of
loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days they're going
to blow up and you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO
sightings. The sighting will occur in Washington or New York,'
he predicted, --'probably Washington.'"

Somebody besides the Air Force was obviously paying a lot of
attention to the situation.

Then there are the Wilbert Smith papers. Smith's memo to the
Canadian Dept. of Transport on Nov 21, 1950 following a briefing
with Dr. Robert Sarbacher in Washington stated: "The matter
[flying saucers] is the most highly clasified subject in the
United States Government, rating higher than even the H-bomb...
Their modus operandi is unknown but concentrated effort is being
made by A SMALL GROUP HEADED BY DOCTOR VANNEVAR BUSH."

Tracked down 30+ years later, Sarbarcher wrote William Steinman
the following: "John von Neuman was definitely involved. Dr.
Vannevar Bush was definitely involved, and I think Robert
Oppenheimer also."

Also fingered by Sarbacher as being involved in briefings at
Wright-Patterson was Dr. Eric Walker (President of Penn State
University and former head of the Dept. of Electrical
Engineering and Dean of Engineering and Architecture). Walker
also served as Executive Secretary of the Research and
Development Board from 1950 to 1952. The RDB was the brainchild
of Bush to continue defense-related research and development and
came into being. Lloyd Berkner, another alleged MJ-12 member was
Bush's first Executive Secretary (also a member of the CIA's
infamous Robertson Panel in 1953).

Another member of the RDB who independently named Bush, Berkner,
von Neumann, and Walker as either probably or definitely
involved was Dr. Fred Darwin, who was the RDB's Executive
Director of the Guided Missile Committee from 1949 to 1954.

William Steinman interviewed Walker by phone in 1987. According
to Steinman's transcript of his phone conversation, Walker
initially admitted to attending meetings of the RDB "concerning
the military recovery of flying saucers and the bodies of
occupants" around 1950. When Steinman brought up the subject of
MJ-12, Steinman said Walker's reply was, "Yes, I know of MJ-12.
I have known of them for 40 years."

(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

Other of Smith's papers pointed to Bush and the RDB as having
some central role in UFO investigations and control of
information. E.g., Donald Keyhoe had spoken to Smith about his
theories of UFO propulsion and proposed doing a True Magazine
article on it. Although Smith didn't think much of Keyhoe's
handling of the material, he had plenty to say about who would
give final approval to the publication of such an article.

In a memo dated Nov. 24, 1950 to Dr. O. M. Solandt, Chairman of
the Canadian Defense Research Board, Smith wrote, "...the
publication of this material, if _permitted by the United States
Research and Development Board_, would be in the public
interest."

Why would permission be needed from the US RDB for Keyhoe to
publish his article? Where did they get the authority to veto a
magazine article by a private individual in a country with a
supposedly free press?

On Jan. 3, 1951, Smith wrote a letter to Gordon Cox of the
Canadian Embassy in Washington (who had arranged for the
Sarbacher interview a few months letter). In the letter Smith
wrote, "I have heard nothing further in regard to the Keyhoe
article... I imagine that it has long since been returned to the
Canadian Embassy in Washington after which I understand _Keyhoe
was to take it to Doctor Bush for clearance_.

Again, why would Keyhoe need "clearance" from Bush to publish
some dumb flying saucer article?

Further, Cox wrote back to Smith a few days later and said, "The
article was returned to Keyhoe ... and he has not seen it since
nor has he heard anything from Bush or what Bush did."

When I see documentation like this, it's clear that Bush and the
RDB were very deeply involved in highly secretive UFO research
and control of any information on the subject. Whether the
central control group was called MJ-12 or something else is
almost a side issue.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                        Re: Serious Research - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:02:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:44:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Felder


 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:53:19 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:43:30 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:48:19 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >The words/concepts, "deny rights", "exclude," or "enemies"
 >(or any other Mortellaro introduced distortions) are not
 >mine folks. Never said it, never meant it. Just for the
 >record.

The following are from your original post:

 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:47:08 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez

<snip>

 >If the available data is not enough to convince you that there
 >is a real phenomenon involving craft of unknown origin and
 >manufacture, then fine, just step aside while the rest try to
 >move the discussion and the investigation of the subject
 >another square or two on the board

Possible translation: if you don't believe in UFOs, that's fine.
We would appreciate it, however, if you would keep your opinion
to yourself if it differs from the opinions of the rest of us.

<snip>

 >When they 'catch up' and arrive at the point where they realize
 >that we are dealing with a genuine mystery, they may then be
 >able to contribute something of value to the ongoing discussion
 >on this _UFO_ List.

Possible translation: when they learn to believe like we do,
they can contribute to the discussion. Until then, anything they
have to say is of no value, and therefore a waste of our time.

 >IMHO if you honestly believe that there is 'nothing' to all of
 >this even after having studied all the available evidence,
 >then maybe taking up valuable bandwidth on a "UFO List" isn't
 >the most productive way to spend your time and energy.

Possible translation: if you don't believe in UFOs like we do,
go find somewhere else to play. You're wasting our bandwidth.

<snip>

 >Need to actually see a UFO before you believe? That's cool.
 >Wait till you see one, or until they land in your backyard.
 >Then you can join us and help us to figure out just what the
 >hell is going on.

Possible translation: wait until you decide to believe in UFOs
like we do before you join our discussions.

<snip>

 >If you just "don't get it" then you just "don't get it." Fine,
 >please step off and let us all move ahead to a more productive
 >and intelligent discussion of the subject.

Possible translation: If you don't believe in UFOs like we do,
go away and leave us alone.

Now, I didn't send this in for posting to try to start a fight
with you, Mr. Velez. I am simply pointing out that, while you
may not have used the _exact words_ "deny rights", "exclude", or
"enemies", what you wrote could very well be perceived as
implying exactly the "Mortellaro distortions" that you tried to
clarify in your post.

This is just another example, IMHO, of the main drawback to
email list discussions. The written word can be interpreted in
different ways. Without the benefit of voice inflection and
facial expression as a ruler to judge one's implied meanings in
a conversation, there is ample room for more than one
interpretation.

I don't think Mr. Mortellaro had any malicious intent in his
post. I think he was just disagreeing with what he perceived as
the meaning of your posted words.

'Tis the unfortunate nature of the internet that words carry
different meanings in different cultures, and misunderstandings
ensue because of it. I learned up close and personal when I
visited New York. Ya'll don't talk up there like we do down
here. And I found out that the use of a totally innocent word
used here to describe a native of Louisianna will get your ass
kicked in New York City. And there was nothing malicious in my
friend's reaction to the word I innocently used. It was simply a
case of local vernacular creating differing meanings for the
same word.

And, for the record, I agree with Mr. Mortellaro. One needs to
get input from _all_ sides if one is to make an informed
decision about all this stuff. And the "name researchers", if
they don't want to answer the same questions over and over,
don't have to. They all have "delete" functions in their email
programs and can use them if they want.

Ain't free will grand? :)

Putting on my asbestos suit, just in case.....

Bobbie :)
==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
---> backwoods of Mississippi
---> USA
---> planet Earth
---> somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.com
Point of View Webcast
www.dragoncrest.net
Online publishing
==========










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                      Abductee's Books & Investigators

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:02:44 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:49:21 -0400
Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators


I am reading two recent books written by abductees:

'Diary Of An Abduction: A Scientist Probes The
Enigma Of Her Alien Contact' by Angela Thompson

and

'Summoned: Encounters With Alien Intelligence'
by Dana Redfield

What amazes me is that both of them are simply describing
_dreams_. They even recognize them as such, but believe them to
be something else because of some strange physical effects
(cuts, marks, bleedings...).

But, to the point, a different point. There have been some
recent discussions here about how should a proper investigator
work. In Angela Thompson's book I have found a surprising
comment (p. 244):

"(...) The first night at Budd Hopkins's in New York City, I
slept in his daughter's room (...) I wasn't sure if any
Interfaces would occur while I was in Manhattan, but I think
that something happened on Wednesday night. (...) During the
night, I dreamed that someone was doing something with my left
foot. I was thinking: 'I am glad I washed my feet'. On Thrusday
afternoon, when I was putting on my boots, I noticed that I had
a small lump on my left shin surrounded by a small, reddish,
circular area. The hard lump is still there today, although the
redness has disappeared. I told Budd about the lump and showed
it to him. He said that we would examine the incident in a
regression tomorrow.

May 22, 1993

Today, Budd regressed me to the dream surrounding the hard lump
in my left shin. In the regression, I remembered waking up in
the night to find someone sitting at the end of my bed; my left
foot was being manipulated then lowered onto something that felt
like a human thigh. A piece of magnetic curved metal was placed
over my left shin and the area felt numb 'as if part of it
wasn't there'. Then I felt, rather than heard, a 'pop', and a
little thing was implanted into the front of my left leg.

Budd told me that I am the seventeenth person to have something
like this happen while staying at his house."

Let's see. Two years after the strange disapparition of Linda
Cortile's implant, Hopkins got another opportunity to hold one
implant and did nothing. Maybe because (p. 244): "(...) in my
regression, the person who implanted the device was not a gray
but a human person"?

Angela Thompson is the 17th person visited by the Grays inside
Hopkins's house! And, what has he done, at least, to try to
catch _them_ in the act? Absolutely nothing. What kind of
investigator is he?

IMHO, if this is true, the little respect I have for him as an
investigator, evaporates.


Yours,

Luis R. Gonzlez Manso









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                           Sgt. Moody's Abduction

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:33:30 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:53:04 -0400
Subject: Sgt. Moody's Abduction


I have just read the interesting 'Extraordinary Encounters: An
Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrials and Otherworldly Beings' by
Jerome Clark.

Good work! I do not share your points of view about UFOs, but I
can appreciate good researching.

One comment got my eye (p. 264-5):

      "Interestingly, Walton's is one of the first two cases in
      the UFO literature to describe the gray aliens".

I consulted Lorenzen's 'Abducted!' and this was Charles Moody's
description (p. 47):

      "It had a head, with the cranium about one third larger
      than an average human head. There was no hair, no
      eyelashes, no eyebrow. The ears were smaller than a
      human's, as was the nose, and the skin was whitish-gar in
      color (...) The brow was a protuding one and the eyes
      beneath were not ovoid like those of a human's, but more
      rounded".

Once again, refering to my comments to Mr. Sandow (Re: 2001. A
Space Odyssey - in Gray), the witness did not described big,
black, slanted eyes; instead they looked like fetal eyes. But
this is another story.

I would like to know if there was any follow-up of this case.
Sgt. Moody was ordered overseas before the investigation was
ended, and it would be very interesting to know more about it.

Specially, after reading few pages before in Clark's
Encyclopedia about the "Holloman Aliens" (with large noses!!),
mentioned by Robert Emenegger in a book published just the year
before Sgt. Moody (who worked the swing shift at Holloman Air
Force Base) claimed his abduction.


Yours,

Luis R. Gonzalez Manso








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:14:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:55:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 01:11:59 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Here's a snippet from Spaur's own words:

 >>"It's about fifty feet across,

 >How did he determine this? A mystery object at an unknown
 >distance and he knew it's size? I don't think so. But, if he
 >assumed that it was this size and at a distance as he was
 >chasing it, he might have followed Venus for 80 miles into the
 >next state.

 >>and I can just make out a dome or
 >>something on the top, but that's very dark. The bottom is real
 >>bright; it's putting out a beam of light that makes a big spot
 >>underneath. It's like it's sitting on the beam.

 >Classic Venus, sparkling in the early morning skies to a witness
 >who thinks it's a real object a few miles away. The dome is a
 >slightly astigmatic image of the planet and the beam it's
 >sitting on is caused by diffraction of the image by his
 >eyelashes.

Classic Venus or 'Klassic stretch'?

 >>It was overhead
 >>a minute ago, and it was as bright as day here: Our headlights
 >>didn't make nearly as much light as it did. And this is no
 >>helicopter or anything like that; it's perfectly still and it
 >>just makes a humming noise." [2]

 >Yes, and it was 50 feet across.

Uh, oh. The beginning of witness disparagement?

Bob knows we all know that the 50 ft has to be a guess if Spaur
didn't know the distance. So, arguing from the point of view
that "it must have been Venus and no other explanation makes any
sense and besides TRueUFOs aren't real so it must have been
Venus," it is "OK" to imply that, if Spaur were so
dumb/stupid/naive/pick one (or several) to think that Venus was
only 50 feet wide, that therefore you can't trust his report in
any way.

 >>From the transcript with Quintanilla it's obvious that during
 >>parts of the chase, the object is at a low altitude and passes
 >>over several other police cars.

 >The unknown object, of unknown size, and hence unknown distance,
 >was of course assumed to have passed over those in front. Hell,
 >it was 50 feet across, remember, and they chased it four more
 >than an hour and never caught up to it?

Let's not make the Klassic mistake of mixing up the end of the
sighting with the beginning. There is an argument to be made for
Venus at the end. But any explanation involving known celestial
objects at the beginning must be proven basded on observations
at the beginning of the sighting. Any truly perceptive ufologist
will not, at least in this instance, accept the argument that
"it was Venus at the end, therefore it was VEnus at the
beginning."

<snip>

 >Now, would you please explain to List members how Venus can:

 >>- maneuver overhead
 >>- make a humming noise
 >>- put out a beam of light
 >>- make it seem as bright as day
 >>- appear as a large glowing object, fifty feet across

 >Well, if you had chased Venus across two states, I suppose that
 >it could well nigh be capable of anything. It's all in the eyes
 >of the beholders, my friend.

Again, the fallacious argument that "it was Venus at the end,
therefore it was Venus at the beginning."









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:20:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:57:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 04:33:38 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:05:17 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>>So they knew it was bogus but wanted to document the nutball so
 >>>they could trumpet his crazy testimony to the detriment of
 >>>accurate witnesses who were shunted aside and left uncounted. So
 >>>that debunkers could forever after seize upon crackpot testimony
 >>such as this as Exhibit A in the Case Against the UFO.>>

 >>Brad:

 >>It isn't enough that UFO proponents insist on generalizing about
 >>what is shown by the "unidentified" residue, while refusing to
 >>consider the implications of the IFOs, now "bogus" cases which
 >>turn out to be IFOs are not even to be considered an IFO?

 >>C'mon, Brad. How did this incident come to the attention of the
 >>Condon people if it wasn't a "UFO" report? The witnesses
 >>obviously didn't consider it "bogus", or they wouldn't have
 >>bothered to tell anybody.>


 >Bob,

 >Do you just deliberately delete all the identifying data from my
 >posts (that this was Case 45 in the Condon Report pp. 395-6) to
 >make it difficult for me and others to reference the facts??? I
 >consider that deliberate obstructionism.

 >This was a crooked fraud by the Condon Committee itself which
 >knew damned well from the start that this was a hot-air balloon
 >prank right from the night of the sighting in Jan 3, 1968, when
 >the call came from the "several persons" (possibly the hoaxers
 >themselves at the launching site) who described an "illuminated
 >transparent object drifting over the town" of Castle Rock,
 >Colo., virtually in the Condon Project's backyard. Notice
 >nothing about a "UFO" in those words used to paraphrase the
 >_accurate_ witn ess reporting in the Condon Report:

I thank Brad Sparks for bringing this "hoax" by Condon
(exaggeration of the testimony of one witness to imply that
there were many who made the same erroneous claims about
spacecraft) to our attention.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                        Re: Serious Research - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:27:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:17:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Young


 >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one thing,
 >but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive
 >(like having 500 lbs of lead in your pants while trying to climb
 >Mt. Everest) to continue to indulge the ones who refuse to
 >accept all the available evidence.

Hi, John:

You are insisting that everyone must get on your bandwagon, or
take another bus.

But, that's a sick transit, Gloria Mundi.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:31:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:21:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 11:11:40 +0100


 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >To me an important key to Rogue River is that the sighting was
 >duplicated in extensive detail (virtually the same UFO - it was
 >even dirty in the same places!) in a sighting from Luton,
 >England ten years later.

 >When this case came to my attention the witness did not know
 >about Rogue River and was stunned when I later showed him the
 >Blue Book report. There is little doubt he seemed to have drawn
 >what the witnesses at Rogue River reported.

 >I actually wrote an article on the very close comparison between
 >these two cases - which is easily the strongest match I have
 >ever seen to the repeat sighting of the exact same UFO (and one
 >with various unusual associated features that make a match by
 >coincidence rather unlikely). Yet these were allegedly witnessed
 >in two different locations at different times and on different
 >continents.

I believe it was the Luton witness referred to here who
cointacted me, probably back in 1980 when I was in England. HE
drew a picture of the object for me... lots of detail. I can't
recall whether he was familiar with the Rogue River case before
or after I talked about it. But as I recall he was a child
playing with other children in a schoolyard when a large round
disc-like object hovered over them. I remember him saying there
was a teacher who was also a witness and he desparately wanted
to contact that teacher to get a confirmation of his own
sighting. He wrote me a long letter about it. This was years
ago... I have no idea where the material he sent might be,
assuming it still exists.

There was no doubt of the similarity between what he drew and
the Rogue River illustration.

 >My report on this was I think the last article that I wrote for
 >FSR magazine titled 'In search of a UFO stereotype'. Its in
 >Volume 28 No 4 (l983) - if you want to check out why the
 >comparisons intrigued me and are so remarkable.

 >More recently, I noticed the photos of the Silverbug
 >experimental project from the l950s in International UFO
 >Reporter and the similarity struck me. I wondered if a prototype
 >had flown from bases in both the US and UK between l947 and
 >l957. In addition there is a 'crashed saucer' report from Fort
 >Riley Kansas in the l960s that describes (although here less
 >clearly) what resembles the same object - causing me to wonder
 >if these are all part of one trail of experimental aircraft
 >projects.

Investigators have been pursuing the "advanced unknown
airecraft" theory for years. This was one of the first
suggestions in 1947 (even by Kenneth Arnold). The FBI requested
a statement from the Air Force about the secret project
possibility and was told "No" by the general in charge of AF
research (in a letter by GEn. Schulgen).

There was a lot of "paper engineering" of advanced designs. Even
Alfred Loedding, who probably initiated Project Sign, was well
into circular aircraft designs. I can imagine when the first
reports came across his desk in 1947 that his first thought was,
"Wow, somebody did it!" (made a circular or semicircular
aircraft).

At any rate, any such design would have been experimental and
experimental aircraft weren;'t flying over remote areas (a) where
they could be seen, (b) where there would be no help trouble if
there were an accident (crash).








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:35:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:23:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Maccabee


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:44:48 -0400


 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I wouldn't be so quick to reject Venus as an explanation for
 >this sighting though.

 >I know it doesn't fit the facts, but who cares?

 >God save us from any dreadful true UFO.

Actually, I was partial to pelicans... the thin,round, shiny
kind.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                       Sheaffer Vs. The 'Chupacabras'

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:45:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:29:14 -0400
Subject: Sheaffer Vs. The 'Chupacabras'


Hi!

I would like to share with you a response to an article, by Mr..
Robert Sheaffer in the Skeptical Inquirer titled: 'The Great
Chupacabras Conspiracy', by our associate Dr. Willy Smith of
UNICAT Project.

-----

Robert Sheaffer Vs. The 'Chupacabras'

I always peruse the pages of the Skeptical Inquirer with
interest because many times I find there articles that reveal
the true nature of the self-appointed censors of what deserves
scrutiny and serious investigation. The March/April 2001
contains a typical piece by Mr Robert Sheaffer, whose claim to
fame on ufological matters stems from a book published in 1986:
'The UFO Verdict: Examining The Evidence'. which is precisely
what he didn't do.

The recent article has also a misleading title: 'The Great
Chupacabra Conspiracy', because the uninformed reader will not
learn from here what exactly a "chupacabra" is, much less who
the conspiracy or the conspirators are. Sheaffer names "en
passant" the FBI, implying without saying it that the American
government is behind the activities of those creatures, which
have been reported from many different countries, not all of
them Spanish speaking. This did not deter the author from
stating that

      "the animals torment Hispanic farmers and ranchers, but
      never trouble those from other cultural backgrounds"

implying that whoever is sponsoring the events has a definite
target: Spanish speaking farmers. Mr. Sheaffer does not offer
any supporting references for this broad statement, but this
omission may have been intentional. Because an extra-terrestrial
origin is thus ruled out, and the alternative of a conspiracy
indicated in the title becomes more credible.

It also implies that Mr Sheaffer did not bother to review the
copious literature existing on the incidents, and has not
visited the places where the animals have been reported and
interview the witnesses. He didn't have to travel far,: Miami
would have been enough.

But of course, for an skeptic this is not necessary: why to
waste time and money investigating a phenomenon which we know
does not exist. This reminds me of those fathers of the Church
that centuries refused to look through Galileo's telescope
because they knew better. And at this point, I can't help to
wonder if Mr. Sheaffer knows of the physical evidence collected
that support the reality of the creatures: (i) cast of the foot
imprints, identical although were collected in distant lands
(Miami, Chile, Spain); (ii) samples of hairs; (iii) specimens of
fecal matters; (iv) the testimony of numerous eyewitness, which
of course, one must ignore as everyone knows to be totally
unreliable.

To give credit where credit is due, Mr. Sheaffer mentions Dr.
Virgilio Snchez Ocejo as a serious investigator who has
proposed a more reasonable name for the so far incorrectly
called "chupacabra": which accurately describes the activities
of those creatures.

At this point Mr. Sheaffer runs out of steam and haven't said
practically nothing about the "chupacabras", and much less about
the conspiracy used as a hook in the tittle, he falls back onto
the tired criticisms used by the pseudo skeptics in their weak
efforts to deny ideas they do not like. He refers to other
unrelated cases and manages to increase the length of the
article by a factor of 4, perhaps a requirement to secure
publication in the pages of the Skeptical Inquirer. But it makes
me sad to see he is still barking at the wrong tree...

I also would like to suggest to Mr. Scheaffer to read the
article by Bertrand Russell which appeared in the May/June 2001
issue of the Skeptical Inquirer. He might learn a thing or two
about becoming a critic.


Dr. Willy Smith
UNICAT Project
May 28, 2001

-----

Dr. Virgilio Snchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
Chupacabras
http://ufomiami.homestead.com/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                 Re: Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:04:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:31:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Balsa-Like Aerogel Material - Maccabee


 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:51:25 EDT
 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Subject: Balsa-Like Aerogel Material
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >FYI in re Roswell's reported high-strength balsa-like materials
 >(and Corso's abject failure to pick up on this). Doesn't prove
 >it was ET but it is interesting.

 >Source: Nature

 >Science Update Tuesday 22 May 2001

 >http://www.nature.com/nsu/010524/010524-8.html

 >technology: Nothing to it

 >Philip Ball

 >It's not much more than smoke. Yet the new material developed at
 >the University of Oklahoma is no lightweight when it comes to
 >strength (1). An inch-square block weighs barely more than a
 >gram, making it only half as dense as balsa wood. But you need a
 >hammer to break it.

Thanks for reminding us that we still have a lot to learn about
materials. Construction of large volumes of material molecule by
molecule is still in the distant future.

One can hardly predict the strength and "lightness" of, for
example, carbon based materials constructed this way. IF one
could make a aerogel of graphite the strength to weight ratio
,might even be greater than reported in this article.

Anyway, I guess lesson to be learned here is that we can't
reject Roswell based on the claims of material that was
lightweight yet extremely strong just because we don't know (or
didn't know) how to make such materials.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:32:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:33:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Maccabee


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Regarding the compartmentalization and non-sharing of
classified information:

 >As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >classified side to it.

 >If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

Blue Book was such a "leaky" and "sloppy" organization (perhaps
except when Ruppelt was in charge) that "anybody" could have
been a link to a hypothetical "real Project Blue Book", i.e., a
much more highly classified project that made use of BB data
without providing any feedback to BB. Low level connections
would have been simple to arrange. Secretary Jones of BB might
simply be given the job of alerting Secretary Smith of the Real
BB to the occurence of really good cases. ANd then there were
also the non-BB reporting channels.

The testimony of Bill Coleman is interesting in this regard. As
I recall he was flying in a bomber with Northrup and others when
they saw and semi-chased a flying saucer. He was aware that a
report was made, ostensibly to BB. Some years later he happened
to be in charge of BB and searched for his report. It did not
exist... at least not in the BB file.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:00:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:37:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Friedman


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:29:36 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >><snip>

 >>>I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >>>that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >>>says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >>>been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >>>was in such an outfit.

 >>>Jan Aldrich

 >>Hi Jan,

 >>As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
 >>or ever existed.

 ><snip>

 >>Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
 >>program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
 >>doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
 >>program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
 >>from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
 >>program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
 >>in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

 >This makes no sense at all. Blue Book was not a TS Codeword
 >program. MJ-12 was purportedly set up by Truman to control _all_
 >UFO information, not just its own supposedly limited
 >jurisdiction (by your theory).

 From whence cometh this claim? Not from the EBD. Obviously
nobody could control what people saw or reported in the way of
UFOs. They could create a climate of ridicule and cetainty of
nothing exciting going on. Exactly what Menzel did which turned
off the press and the scientific community

 >>For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
 >>clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
 >>dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
 >>clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
 >>systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
 >>the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
 >>medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
 >>people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
 >>people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

 >This again makes no sense. The MJ-12 Committee members were the
 >top purported _policymakers_ who had to have access to _all_
 >information in order to set UFO policy even if lower level
 >personnel were all compartmented. Menzel was an alleged member
 >of the MJ-12 Committee, not some lower level scientist
 >consultant as you seem to be treating him here.

"Policy makers" sounds like elected officials and, of course,
there were none on MJ-12.

Van Bush and General Groves insisted, for example, that even
brilliant scientists working on the Manhattan Project were to
know only what they needed to know for their work no matter how
curious they were about work in the next office. Of course
Menzel was a consultant. His full time job was as a professor at
Harvard.

 >>Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
 >>denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
 >>called basic information.

 >No way, I don't buy it. Menzel did not just have purported
 >"MJ-12 clearance" but was himself allegedly a member of the
 >elite MJ-12 Committee.

 >>As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >>released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >>classified side to it.

 >This is untrue. We have plenty of information directly from BB
 >personnel who have been interviewed, BB's superiors whom I
 >interviewed (Gen. Garland, Col. Bower, et al.), Ruppelt's
 >papers, BB documents _not_ in the National Archives such as
 >those in Hynek's files, CIA, etc., NONE of which shows any
 >"highly classified" or TS Codeword type side to it.

Just why would any of these people tell you anything that was
TOP SECRET Codeword? Did you have a clearance and need to know?

Sounds like Kent Jeffrey.

Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.

There were (at least until Exec. Order 12958), loads of highly
classified materials at archives that were totally inaccessible.
Even the Eisenhower Library had a drawer full. The Kennedy had 10
drawers full.

At visits to 19 archives, I found none had codeword stuff
accessible. Remember the FBI memo saying Air Force and Army
intelligence officials considered the matter of Flying discs TOP
SECRET?.

We haven't seen that stuff.

We also haven't seen the TS materials from the OSI that didn't
get declassified or downgraded when some of their UFO stuff was
added to the Blue Book files.

 >>If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >>have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >>stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

 >That's not what the bogus Eisenhower Briefing Document says --
 >it says MJ-12 had "liason" (stupidly misspelled twice by the
 >hoaxer) with BB's head, _not_ a secretary or a lesser person
 >than the BB chief Ruppelt.

It doesn't say Menzel was the liaison. If Ruppelt had access, do
you really think he would have talked about it? He could have
sent stuff to Air Force Intelligence not knowing where it went
from there. Kind of standard practice to break the chain between
supplier and recipient..


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: alk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:24:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:44:17 -0400
Subject: Re: alk And Action - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000

 >Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
 >science would just come over here and take an honest look at
 >what we've got, things would change

This appeal to physiology, then psychology, to explain
embarrassing puzzles in physics epitomizes a quite general and
interesting tendency in the scientific community. We are
presented with two varieties of phenomena, which we may loosely
call "laboratory" and "natural." The first variety is
reproducible and can be subjected to experimental manipulation,
or is at least predictable in advance.

The second variety is unreproducible and unpredictable
(consisting of, for example, meteorites, ball lightning, novae)
and if also transient the experimenter is fortunate indeed to
have his apparatus at the right place at the right time.
Consequently, science must rely for its information on that much
mistrusted individual, the layman to whom is attributed the
property of being able to observe objectively anything that can
be explained, but imagining everything that can't. History is
replete with examples, not least that of the meteorite.

Necessarily, a subjective explanation loses its crediblity if
one is presented with tangible physical evidence.... In this
case the usual procedure is to deny the veracity of such
reports. The philosophy of this approach seems to be that if a
naturally occurring phenomenon is hard to account for
conventionally (1) decide that it has no physical reality; (2)
construct a physiological or psychological explanation; (3)
ignore the physical evidence that contradicts this explanation.

All this bears a striking resemblance to the mistreatment of
that other perennial, and highly disreputable subject of
unidentified flying objects, to which the above philosophy has
been consistently applied for 25 years. -- P.C.W. Davies,
Nature, April 30, 1971


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                      Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:23:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:48:37 -0400
Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: New Karl Pflock Book
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:32:25 -0500

<snip>

 >Sadly, the investigation did not begin until 30 years after the
 >fact. Beyond that, it suffered all kinds of problems, some in
 >the nature of things, some caused by dishonest informants and
 >various red herrings. At this stage Roswell seems hopeless --
 >the reason, incidentally, I devoted comparatively little space
 >to it in my encyclopedia.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry,

On any other day of the week, I'd agree, but it's Friday and I'm
feeling... cantankerous.

Roswell remains important for any number of obvious reasons.

For starters, it either happened as advertized -- or it didn't. No
middle ground -- it was mundane or ET.

If it didn't happen, ie, no exotic debris or bodies were
recovered, then it's a classic example (and brutal lesson) of
making a mountain out of a molehill, as well as how _not_ to
investigate a UFO case. In fact, it would be a classic autopsy
of myth-making.

If it did happen, then the implications are equally staggering,
even more so, in the opposite direction. To wit, if exotic
debris and bodies were recovered, then something very much like
MJ-12 no doubt would have been created, thus rendering
the-world-as-seen-through-Corso's- eyes at least semi-plausible.

It wouldn't make any difference how long after events the
investigation began, because many of the consequences (bodies,
debris, MJ-12, etc) would still be in existence and therefore
capable, theoretically, of discovery.

On the other hand, both the Cold War and the Race to the Moon
would be hard to square with a world history line in which we
had evidence of alien visitation as far back as 1947. If the
latter were the case, I doubt seriously whether the second half
of the 20th century would have unfolded as it has. Or at least
that argument could be made.

My two cents.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                     Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:56:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:50:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Myers


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 21:53:23 -0000

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:14:15 -0700

 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >Shucks, Royce, you don't even rate a "psychic shield." That
 >appears to be the moral equivalent of a Distinguished Flying
 >Cross.

 >Dick Hall, D.F.C., P.S.

I bow my head in shame... <sniffle>...and marvel at your
greatness.....


Regards,

Royce J. Myers III

UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 20:44:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:53:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Clark


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:03:59 +0100


Listfolk,

A whole lot of questions asked here, by individuals unfamiliar
with Bill Weitzel's commendably thorough investigation for
NICAP. Since Weitzel's long report has never been published, I
refer readers to my "Portage County Sightings" entry, which
draws in good part on Weitzel's work.

 >"The allegedly mysterious automobile is part of the folklore of
 >the Portage County case, but it's no part of the factual aspect
 >of this crucial incident.

 >The only thorough investigation was conducted by Bill Weitzel
 >for NICAP. Weitzel, who learned that the automobile's owner was
 >quickly traced, actually examined the vehicle himself while it
 >was still parked along 224. He wrote, "It had some tapes, a
 >cheap Japanese transistor toy tape recorder with a tape of
 >hillbilly music on it, some miscellaneous electrical gear, in
 >the back seat. Trunk full of old tires." The 'Seven Steps to
 >Hell' insignia was not on the car, only in witness Dale Spaur's
 >subsequent nightmares".

 >When did Spaur first speak of this insignia?

In a newspaper interview cited in my entry.

 >Did he later admit it only existed in his dreams, or is that
 >purely conjecture, simply because Weitzel didn't note having
 >seen the same insignia?

"Admit" is a strange verb here. Spaur had nothing to "admit,"
which - in typical debunker smear - implies he was caught at
doing something wrong. He told a newspaper reporter about a
recurring nightmare. Later, careless writers treated it as if it
were something that Spaur claimed happened in reality. It's
depressing to see believers' careless use of Spaur's testimony
being continued in its own way by equally careless debunkers.
Typical, though.

 >Was Spaur's partner, Deputy Sheriff Neff ever asked about the
 >insignia and if so, what were his comments?

A really, really dumb question. See above.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:56:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

 >Dennis,

 >>Here's an alternative reading of the Air Force's comments. I'm
 >>sure there are probably others.

 >>The Air Force essentially took the Tales of Kaufmann, Glen
 >>Dennis and some others at face value. They then said, since we
 >>didn't recover any alien bodies at Roswell, how might the idea
 >>that we did have arisen? Here's one possibility, and, yes, we
 >>realize that there is a time discrepancy, but maybe the
 >>witnesses misremembered the timing of events.

 >You are a charitable man, my friend. Condon and Blue
 >Book could have used you in their p.r. offices. Maybe
 >you'd be so persuasive that we'd actually end up grateful
 >for lousy, dishonest explanations of UFO reports.


Jerry,

Last time I looked, no one was talking about Condon and Blue Book.

 >>Of course, there was an alternative. The Air Force could have
 >>said, "Well, to tell the truth, we think these people are, uh
 >>liars, or, if you prefer, simply exaggerators."

 >What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
 >its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
 >or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
 >advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
 >for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

And no one will ever match you for your reading of the AF
report... What is cynical about not calling people liars, which
would have only invited lawsuits? Did you think the AF was
stoopid, too?

But, wait a minute, you say ufology has debunked these accounts
of bodies (after being the first to promote them). So, what is
it, exactly, that the Air Force is guilty of in _this_ report -
not admitting that they actually have bodies?

 >And what would have stopped the AF from charging that the
 >informants were hoaxers? That never stopped Blue Book, which
 >didn't hesitate to call witnesses hoaxers whether they were or
 >not.

There you go bringing up Blue Book again. As best my memory
serves, BB listed something like one or two percent of all cases
as hoaxes. You use the term Air Force as something monolithic
and static over time. Is that actually the case? I don't know. I
thought the latest AF Secretary offered anyone immunity if they
were willing to testify about Roswell.

Quintanilla didn't even call Zamora a hoaxer, though he probably
would have liked to. But we weren't talking about past AF
history, until you brought it up (thereby acting as if I was an
apologist for everything they've done or haven't done regarding
UFOs, when I was addressing a specific instance, and a specific
instance only. Sorry, but that brush won't tar.)

 >>Would you have preferred that approach to the one they took?

 >Yes, in point of fact. Wouldn't you? It would have been more
 >honest, but I guess that's an adjective one seldom has occasion
 >to use when one is discussing the Air Force and UFOs.

There you go again: AF & UFOs equal dishonesty and cynicism and
nothing but. You probably think they rammed the Chinese pilot,
too.

Simple question: do you think they currently have in their possession
alien bodies from Roswell, given that ufologists have debunked so many
alleged Roswell "witnesses" who claim that they do?

If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
Answer? They can't.

 >>BTW, wasn't there also a GAO investigation of Roswell? Remember
 >>reading _anything_ favorable about its conclusions in the UFO
 >>press?

 >Uh, do ufologists have some obligation, unlike other citizens,
 >to praise government actions mindlessly and endorse official
 >conclusions unthinkingly? Ufologists quite rightly were
 >unsatisfied and/or suspicious, given the long, sorry history of
 >government mishandling of UFO issues.

Well, that's being objective, ain't it?  And who, other than
you, said anything about mindlessly praising government actions
or unthinkingly endorsing official conclusions? I didn't. I was
talking about the way the AF report chose to address a small
clump of witnesses which the UFO literature (until it had
serious second thoughts) chose to tout as reliable and worthy of
our consideration. It doesn't seem to strike you as a failing
that they showed up in our literature in the first place, let's
just  crown the ufologists for eventually outing them - you seem
to think this was the AF's job - and contemn the AF as cynical
and whatnot for not labeling them hoaxers or liars.

 >>Just checked the Index of the 2nd ed. of your UFO Encyclopedia
 >>and didn't see either General Accounting Office or Steven Schiff
 >>listed.

 >Huh? What does this have to do with anything? In any event,
 >you're wrong. The GAO is mentioned on page 266 of the second
 >edition. What's your point, anyway?

What it has to do with anything, Jerry, is this: yours is a UFO
encyclopedia, Roswell is an important UFO case. The AF report
and the GAO report are UFO news and history. (I shouldn't be
having to explain this.)

I'm glad to see the GAO is indeed mentioned on page 266. When
thumbing through the Index, my mind was thinking "Government"
Accounting Office, not General. (The GAO is also mentioned on p.
953, in a different context.) Here is that reference to it:

"All of this led to books, articles, films, videos, and renewed
government inquiries (by the General Accounting Office and by
the Air Force.)

Here's something else it has to do with: the GAO didn't uncover
evidence of any alien bodies at Roswell, either. Nor, as I
recall, evidence of witnesses being intimidated. Is it your
studied opinion, then, that GAO=AF, ie, dishonesty, cynicism,
etc, in every instance and all the time, or just in UFO matters?

Does this also include the FBI, CIA and NSA? Maybe it would just
be easier to ask which, if any, government agency, isn't guilty
of UFO crimes? Parks and Wildlife? Who is orchestrating this
50-year-old policy, anyway - or is it just "understood"?

I was only addressing one aspect of the AF Roswell report, one
involving already discredited witnesses, as we both agree, and
you turn it into a holy jihad against the AF itself, along with
snide insinuations that I would have made a good pr person for
BB or Condon, and we all know what that means, don't we? You're
either with us (on everything) or you're against us.

Well, like you say, Jerry, life's more complicated than that.

But I'll take you at your word. Since the AF didn't admit to
recovering alien bodies at Roswell that can mean one thing and
one thing only: They recovered alien bodies at Roswell.

And I'll make this simple, too. The GAO conducted a Roswell
investigation contemporaneous with the AF. I had asked you what
your opinion of the former was, whether you held it in the same
contempt and disregard as the AF report? Or whether you - and
ufology at large - could treat it objectively. Objectively here
holding out the possibility - however remote - of conceivably
being true or accurate, or something remotely like that. Since
you object so much to sentences with AF and Roswell in them, I
thought I would substitute GAO for a change.

 >>Anyway, I look forward to ufology's reviews of Pflock's Roswell:
 >>Incon- venient Facts and the Will to Believe.

 >The first will be in IUR, I believe the very next issue of same.

Like I said, I look forward to it, too, which is more than I can
say of most UFO journals these days. A review of another
publication I was looking forward to in the IUR never appeared.
Hopefully, this one will. And hopefully, it won't be authored by
someone named Carey, Galganski or Schmitt.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 26

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 21

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 19:25:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:25:29 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 6 Number 21


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 6, Number 21
May 24, 2001
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/



INDIA CITES HANUMAN FOR TWO MURDERS

Police in India are charging Hanuman, also known as the
Monkey-Man and "the Monkey Monster" with culpability in two
deaths resulting from last week's rampage in Uttar Pradesh
state.

On Friday, May 11, 2001, Hanuman jumped onto a rooftop in the
city of Ghaziabad, in the trans-Yumana region northeast of New
Delhi (India's capital--J.T.) and began biting and scratching
people who had been sleeping on the roof. While fleeing the
black-furred creature, one man slipped on the gutter and fell
off the roof. He plummeted to his death four stories below.

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001, at about 2:30 a.m., Soman, 20, a young
wife who was six months pregnant, was on her veranda at her
apartment house in Ashok Nagar, in eastern Delhi. Suddenly,
Hanuman swung down from the roof and attacked sleeping members
of her family. Soman stumbled while fleeing down the stairs and
then tumbled all the way to the first floor. She died at the
hospital a few hours later.

"She stumbled on the staircase, apparently out of fear," Suresh
Roy, Joint Commissioner of Police, said.

Roy said he had received over 60 reports from neighborhoods east
and northeast of New Delhi, describing attacks by the
monkey-like creature.

"Four municipal lawmakers stated that they would ask (Minister)
L.K. Adventi to deploy (India's) Rapid Action Force" within the
city.

Roy offered a reward of 75,000 rupees ($1,000 USA) to anyone who
could provide the Indian police with a photograph or a video of
Hanuman.

"Police have organized a 'Flying Squad' of 14 officers from
various jurisdictions to investigate the sightings."

Shiv sainiki neighborhood militias--J.T.) were also set up in
areas such as Chhapura, Mohallah, Son Bazar and Krishna Nagar.
In Mohallah, young men armed with lahtis (long hardwood
clubs--J.T.) stopped and searched automobiles, looking for "the
elusive Monkey Man." (See the newspapers Hindustan Times for May
17, 2001; the Deccan Chronicle for May 17, 2001; the Hindustan
Times for May 18, 2001, The Statesman for May 17, 2001 and the
London Daily Telegraph for May 18, 2001. I received a ton of
information on Hanuman, so first let me thank our diligent
correspondents Kenny Young, Louise A. Lowry, Gerry Lovell,
Alfredo Lissoni, Prashant Solomon, Sayed Khan and Steve Wilson
Sr.. Welcome to Monkey Business Week at UFO Roundup. Hanuman has
taken the paranormal community by storm, and we have lots more
information to share.)


HANUMAN GOES ON A RAMPAGE IN INDIA'S TRANS-YUMANA

On Thursday night, May 10, 2001, Vineet Sharma, 18, and his
family were sleeping outside on the veranda of their
grandmother's house Chhaprola when the creature leaped onto the
veranda. Hanuman jumped their grandmother, Dr. Sharoj Sharma
"and punched her in the abdomen."

Kuneet and his brother, Puneet, went to their grandmother's
assistance. "The monkey-man scratched them on their hands and
faces. Then he jumped across the courtyard to the rooftop of a
neighbor, Vidon Sharma," and attacked the people in that house.

"The victims included Amin, Rajinder Siyagi's manservant,
tenants of Dharma Pandit, and a six-month old child."

Kuneet and Puneet described the creature as "1.3 meters (four
and a half feet) tall, with the face of a rhesus monkey,
well-developed shoulders and two eyes with right light emanating
from them."

On Friday evening, May 11, 2001, the creature struck in earnest.
while patrolling the dark streets of Chhaprola, Dr. Sharma and
several other villagers were confronted by Hanuman. "Its body
was covered with fyr but looked human. It screeched at us and
jumped around like a real monkey," one villager said.

A short while later, on the Grand Trunk Road, near the Samtel
factory complex, Ganesh Jha Paraparam and his relatives "were
taking our evening stroll. The creature jumped right onto the
walkway in front of us. . We came face-to-face with this huge
man-monkey. The monster sprang up 6 meters (20 feet) from a
crouching position and caught the branches of the trees."
Hanuman soon lost himself in the thick foliage of the trees.

"The latest eyewitness to the sinister simian is Shamir Begum, a
30-year-old housewife living in the Islamnagar area" of New
Delhi.

"Shamir Begum said the monkey-man was walking on her rooftop.
'By the time we reached her side, the monkey-man had
disappeared,' said a neighbor." "Twin terrors struck Kamla Nehru
Nagar when TWO monkey-men pounced on a resident, Om Vijay, and
scratched his face."

Saturday night, May 12, 2001 saw an explosion of Hanuman
sightings in New Delhi. The creature was sighted in Ghaziabad,
Krishna Nagar, Jatwhara Ghazipur, Shib Bahadur, Nasirpur,
Chapaderpuri, Maliwara and Vijaynagar. Police received 29
reports of Hanuman sightings, and Commissioner Roy said about
half "were confirmed."

More sightings in northeast New Delhi were reported on Sunday,
May 13, 2001 and Monday, May 14, 2001.

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001, with public fears heightened because
of the unfortunate Mrs. Soman, police in Ghaziabad received
eight reports of residents being scratched or bitten.

Also, hundreds of people in the residential C Block of New Ashok
Nagar saw the creature, and one resident named Chander struggled
with it "for 10 minutes."

According to police, Chander was on his balcony when he saw the
monkey-man attacking Rajvan, a neighbor. He reached the alleyway
before Hanuman jumped down from the balcony.

Chander described the creature as "1.3 meters (four and a half
feet) tall, with and the body is shaped like a monkey but its
legs are human."

Chander's wife, Murtri Devi, who witnessed the fight, said, "The
monkey-man hit my husband in the abdomen."

Chander confirmed that he had been punched in the middle. "It
made a fist like a man, and it could hit hard. I let it come
closer and hit it with an overhand right, then a left, then
another right. It didn't like getting punched in the face. I
tried to subdue it, but it was too strong for me. It lifted me
over its head and threw me into some trash barrels."

According to police, Chander "was admitted to Lal Bahadur
Shastri Hospital" in New Delhi "for medical treatment." (We have
over 10 sources for this story, so I'm going to list them by
newspaper and date. They include Hindustan Times for May 17,
2001; Agence France Presse for May 17, 2001; Hindustan Times for
May 12, 2001; Times of India for May 15, 2001; Hindustan Times
for May 15, 2001; Hindustan Times for May 9, 2001; Deccan
Chronicle for May 17, 2001; The Statesman for May 17, 2001; USA
Today for May 17, 2001 and the London Daily Telegraph for May
18, 2001.)

HINDU AVATAR OR FEMA CYBORG?

In a few neighborhoods of New Delhi, residents dispute the
theories that Hanuman is an avatar of the Hindu gods, an alien
from space or the subcontinent's answer to Bigfoot.

They believe the creature is a "bio-construct" or cyborg.

As reported in the Indian newspaper New Statesman reported, "You
could also cancel out its gymnastic abilities by throwing a pail
of water on the motherboard on its chest, hidden beneath a layer
of fake monkey fur.

"Neighborhoods such as Moshallah, Son Bazar and Krishna Nagar
have their street patrols out in search of the creature. And
beside each door stands a bucket of water, just in case."

Many witnesses claim to have seen "the motherboard" on its chest
and "wires sticking out" of its head and temples. Such reports
fuel speculation that the creature is indeed a cyborg.

In one instance, mysterious human "helpers" were observed near
the creature.

On Friday night, May 11, 2001, "a strange incident happened out
on the Grand Trunk Road near the Samtel factory. While they were
chasing the creature, all of the villagers were suddenly blinded
by a powerful flashlight. They saw three persons getting away in
a Maruti car. The people, who could not be clearly seen, were
running away from them, carrying large sacks filled with
equipment. They waved to the villagers as they drove away onto
the Grand Trunk Road."

Three months ago, UFO Roundup received a publication entitled
Armageddon 2001 by a West Virginia writer. This booklet formed
the basis for our article on black helicopters in West Virginia.

One booklet item that was not used in the original
article--indeed, your editor though it was too fantastic, even
for the Roundup was this paragraph.

"A friend of mine and another man were standing on a country
road (in southern West Virginia), just talking, when one of
FEMA's 'biological experiments' came out of the woods. It was
maybe five feet tall, very slender, and looked more like a human
than an ape. It had on a white headband with little wires
sticking out. It started jogging up the road, away from us.
Couple of minutes later, a white van drove by. There was a whole
lot of radio equipment in the front seat, and some bald guy was
driving it."

When I first read that, I thought, Those two must have been
standing downwind of Granny Clampett's still.

But here we are--thirteen weeks later--and Hanuman suddenly pops
up in India. And I have to wonder. Did those two see "Hanuman"
in training at a FEMA base?

Did the witnesses in Moshallah and Krishna Nagar really see
wires and a motherboard?

Were those FEMA agents who fled in the Maruti car?

Did FEMA bring Hanuman to India for a "field test?"

Questions, questions. (See the New Statesman for May 18, 2001
and the Hindustan Times for May 17, 2001.)

AUSTRALIA'S "OUTBACK TERROR" GOES ON THE PROWL

The elusive Australian "panther," sometimes called the "Outback
Terror," went on the prowl in the Blue Mountains of New South
Wales last week, with 15 sightings of the mystery beast
reported.

The creature resembles a black panther with its sleek-furred,
long-limbed quadruped appearance. But it is not a true cat. Some
people think it is a predatory marsupial, closer in DNA to an
opossum or a kangaroo than any feline.

On Tuesday, May 15, 2001, veteran paranormal researcher "Rex
Gilroy. along with fellow panther expert Greg Foster, has been
commissioned by the Daily Telegraph to hunt for the black
panther" seen recently near Lithgow, N.S.W.

Joining them will be Gilroy's wife Heather.

"Gilroy quickly found 'evidence' of the beast's existence"

"The veteran hunter claims to have first found paw prints of
from where the panther was first seen last week."

Gilroy made plaster casts of the beast's paw prints. Each print
measured 10 centimeters (4 inches) long and 12 centimeters (4.5
inches) wide.

"'From the look of them, I'd say they were definitely panther
prints.'" Gilroy said.

"Two years ago, Mr. Gilroy found a similar set of prints in
Dubbalong Valley, which he also made into a plaster cast."

"Gilroy and Foster will soon travel into Wollongambi National
Park" in search of the panther.

"'There's a lot of bushland out there, and I don't think it's
going to kick back and sit there and wait for someone to try to
capture it,'" said Gilroy, who prefers to follow the elusive
creature through its natural bush habitat.

Also on May 15, "two English (UK) tourists thought they had
stumbled across the animal. Clive Grant and Matt Owen were
getting firewood at the Inger Campground in Wentworth Falls,
N.S.W. when they discovered large paw prints" near their tent.

""'It scared the hell out of us, and we bolted back to our car,'
Mr. Grant, 31, of Coventry (UK) said."

"And Mr. Owen, 28, said, "We thought it was the panther everyone
has been talking about, and it petrified us.'"

"Both men were relieved and slightly embarrassed when they
learned that the 'panther' prints were in fact kangaroo prints."
(See the Daily Telegraph of Australia for May 16, 2001, "Up to
15 'panthers' on the prowl in the bush.")

UFO FLIES OVER LAREDO, TEXAS

On Sunday, May 13, 2001, Cesar P. was out in the backyard of his
home in Laredo, Texas when he spotted a UFO.

"It was around 10:30 p.m.," he reported, "When I was getting
ready for bed and I decided to go outside for some fresh air. I
looked up into the clear skies and it was as if I could see the
belt of Orion. Then a little orange dot caught my eye. I stared
motionless at the sky. , trying to convince my own mind that it
was not something out of the ordinary."

"Then, suddenly, it just shot across the starlit sky , with
bright lights all around its perimeter. "

"After it moved around for about two minutes, it just zipped
away to the southeast. But I couldn't find it in the night sky
after that. " (Email Form Report)

CIGAR-SHAPED UFO LANDS IN IONIA, MICHIGAN

On Saturday, May 12, 2001, at 4:30 a.m., Joseph M. was driving
down a rural two-lane road in Ionia, Michigan when he spotted a
silvery shimmer in the road ahead.

"It was a cigar-shaped UFO, and it was right there on the road,"
he reported, " It rose up when I got close in my car. The
silver-plated cigar ducked behind some thick trees, out of
sight."

He described the object as "cigar-shaped, silver in color, about
50 feet (15 meters) off the ground, Its departure speed was
about 70 miles per hour, and it was heading west along that
country road." (Email Form Report)


 From the UFO Files...

2001: A SURPRISE TRIP TO CUZCO

By Sunday night, May 20, 2001, I was in the eighth day of a
mystifying and terrible flu virus that had me as weak as a
kitten. It had finally begun to lessen on Thursday, only to
bounce back with renewed fury that weekend. I went to bed early,
but at 11 p.m. and at midnight I was jolted out of sleep, aching
and feverish, by a series of wracking coughs.

I despaired of getting back to sleep again. But I did.

I dreamed I was in Cuzco, that ancient city tucked away in the
Andes of southern Peru. I was in the Sixteenth Century
Cathedral, with three Peruvian friends. We were looking for a
place to sit or stand. And there was no room in the pews. The
place was packed. And no wonder! Judging from the Vatican flags
and the Papal pavilion at the rear of the cathedral, the Pope
was in town.

We went up the side aisle on the left. I found one single spot
to the left of a small side altar, squeezed in between two
floral displays and knelt there.

Now, the side altar was all decked out for Pope John Paul II's
visit. As is the custom in Latin American countries, there was a
crown on top of the tabernacle. I watched as this grim-faced
bishop tried to move the crown with his staff. At first I
thought he was just trying to straighten it, but then I realized
that he was trying to remove it. Trying much too hard, really.
Sure enough, his efforts led to disaster. Crown, tabernacle,
linens, candles and everything toppled behind the altar. The
lights in that alcove winked out, showing only a bare altar in
darkness.

Seconds later, the Pope walked by on his way to the front of the
church. Pope John Paul II must have been deep in prayer or
meditation or something, because he didn't even notice. He went
straight to the main altar, then, to my surprise, straight past
it to the side door. My last glimpse of him was a huddled figure
surrounded by daylight. No, not exactly daylight. More of an
eye-dazzling unearthly radiance.

Seconds later, the shaking began. Stone columns creaked and
groaned. Plaster dust trickled from the ceiling. A deafening cry
went up, "El temblor! El temblor!" (Spanish for
"Earthquake!"--J.T.)

Everybody stampeded to the exits.

I found myself out in the Plaza de Armas. Clouds of smoke and
dust billowed upwards from the western hillside. It had been a
big quake, perhaps as big as the one in 1950. And I felt sick,
feverish and couldn't stop coughing. While Peruvian police and
soldiers moved in, I tottered across the plaza and collapsed on
a park bench.

I watched the rescue efforts for a while. Then I felt a hand on
my shoulder. I looked up and it was Tackanash. He was dressed
for powwow, wearing a bead-worked black shirt with a thunderbird
motif. He held a clay Incan cup.

Head back, I moaned, "Nimishoo, I'm sick!"

"I know." He pushed the cool clay cup into my hands. "Drink
this."

I did. It was an Anishinabe herbal tea of some kind. No tropical
South American flavors. I tasted peppermint and pine needle but
the rest was unfamiliar.

Handing back the empty cup, I murmured, "H-How d-did you find
me?"

"It was no problem. I always know where to find you."

I finally got around to asking a question which had troubled me
when I was awake. "Why me?" I asked, "Why did you select me?"

He showed a grim smile. "Because you were the only kid in that
theatre who didn't cheer when John Wayne murdered the Indian."

"I didn't think killing Cicatrice was a laudatory act. I still
don't."

"Remember the first time you lived here?"

So I spent a few minutes pointing out the highlights of Cuzco to
my Anishinabe dream companion. He asked if I felt strong enough
to walk. I did and said so.

Surprisingly, the more I walked, the better I felt. We hiked
uphill on that narrow cobblestoned avenue. Houses gradually gave
way to fields of tall dry grass. Off to the right I could see
the Inca fortress of Sacsahuaman. The sky was clear with many
fleecy clouds.

We stopped at the foot of a terraced hillside. Turning to me,
Tackanash said, "You're here to receive a message. It's waiting
for you at the top."

I glanced at the stonewalled terraces. Each was just over a
meter high. "There's no trail."

"No bus service, either." He laughed. "You'll find a way."

I set off, climbing up onto the first terrace and hopping up to
the second. I was careful not to step on the turf where it was
muddy. I knew I'd sink to my knees. But if the terrace was dry,
I found I could stand on the earth, not just the stone rim.

It was too weird. A little while ago, I'd been too sick to
stand. Now I was out hopping Incan terraces. I wasn't exactly
breaking any speed records, but I was making progress.

At least I reached the top. Sacsahuaman was a gray mound on the
horizon. Looking over my shoulder, I could see Cuzco's orange
rooftops and brown Baroque churches sprawling across the valley
floor. The streets were full of people--quake survivors.

I heard voices speaking Quechua, turned northward and saw a
group of men in traditional garb. The one in front looked like
he had stepped out of the pages of Garcilaso de la Vega. He
looked vaguely familiar, and then I recognized him from the
picture on the Peruvian banknote--the Inca Pachacutec.

I heard Tackanash's whisper in my ear. "Don't approach him. Wait
until he summons you, boy."

I turned, but I was alone on that topmost terrace.

I stood there for a few minutes. Pachacutec looked my way and
bade me to join him. I did, and he gripped my shoulders in
welcome.

"Masinaigan, I have a message for the people of Tahuatinsuyo
(South America--J.T.) There are many changes coming. They will
begin after the earthquake--after the death of the old man.
Changes in the way people live and work. Changes in their
families. Changes in the money they use. It is coming far more
quickly than anyone believes possible. They say it will benefit
all the people of Tahuatinsuyo But they lie. The change will
benefit only them...those people!"

He had a warm intimate smile. "Give my best to your grandfather
and the Ainishinabe people. Have a safe journey."

He pointed out a narrow trail that went between two grassy
hillsides. I started down it. When I reached the bend, I looked
back. Pachacutec and the others were gone.

The trail brought me back to the main road, just north of the
Tambomachay ruins. Tackanash was waiting there. In his fedora
and striped poncho, he looked like a native Peruvian. He gave me
a gray alpaca poncho, which I put on, and we headed back into
the city, just talking.

We stopped at a corner store near the plaza. I saw
Spanish-language newspapers with Dick Cheney's photo on page
one. What's up with Cheney? I wondered.

(Editor's Note: Cheney was page one news on May 21, 2001.
Amazingly, I saw a real-life counterpart to the dream newspaper
when I picked up USA Today--six hours later!)

Just then a red-haired American woman I had never seen before
approached me and Tackanash. Her keen gaze zeroed in on me.
"You're Angie Biwaban's father."

"Sort of," I replied. "Angie Biwaban" is a detective heroine I
dreamed up years ago and the star of five novels.

"They know you're here," the woman said ominously.

"Whoop-de-do for them," says I, quoting a long-ago babysitter.

"Do you have a car?" Tackanash asked her.

"Sure," she replied, "But La Control (police checkpoints) are
going to be pretty tight."

"Not if we head for the Rio de la Plata (Argentina)," I
remarked.

And I woke up.

I was surprised for a number of reasons. First, this is the
first time Tackanash has appeared in a long while. Second, I
really did feel better. My fever was gone, and my throat wasn't
quite so raw. Third, most of the predictions had been cloaked in
symbolism. All except for Pachacutec's, which were pretty
straightforward. All in all, a very strange dream.

Message delivered, Lord Inca. Rest well in Cuzco.

That's it for this week. Keep your eye on the website for a
special message. Best wishes and have a great week from "the
paper that goes home--UFO Roundup.


UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2001 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.

E-Mail Reports to: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
or use the Sighting Report Form at:

http://ufoinfo.com/forms/form_sighting.htm

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

UFOINFO: http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives of the UK UFO Network Bulletin,
AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences,
UFO + PSI Magazine also available, plus archives of
Filer's Files and Oz 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #350

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:14:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:50:47 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #350


Apology to MW #350 (For May 26, 2001)

What seems plain as virgin day? The FBI's in disarray! Remember,
it's a glad elite, said circumspect (but indiscrete) that keeps
real knowledge from us all with clever dodges, tricks and
stalls. UFOs they've hidden, friend, and we shan't know what
they'd portend. Facts and figures are distorted - "covered up",
it's been reported. They don't work for 'us', you know, though
common people front their dough. They are tools of corporate
masters; what's good for them spells our disaster.

Their beginning's fraught with stain. Hoover was a monster,
plain. A wolf, and in his own employ, he lived a life that
few'd enjoy. He kept the records, massive files, he then used to
keep defiled... men who might have been courageous -
sociopathy's contagious. Streets and buildings named for him
hide God knows what contained within. Ruby Ridge and Waco show
that he lives on, though, down below, burning in a hell he made
while innocents live lives betrayed.

The FBI's just what we know, but other letters hide, hello!
Projects black and indistinct are busy with the work that
stinks. We are told it's for our safety, but that's a road not
traveled safely. Much that happens that way now... if we but
_knew_ we'd disallow! People suffer, countries fall, and unknown
secrets make us crawl, dancing to the tune of those that keep
those secrets, don't you know. We're denied control of these.
Their 'letters' keep us on our knees.

The CIA and ATF, are programs tacking right, not left. We don't
know what they have done. We can't guess what tales are spun. We
don't know their covert purpose. Oversight shall not alert us.
We're just mushrooms in the dark, fed manure plain and stark.
We're just here to pay the bill for services they don't fulfil.
Kept in chains they've manufactured, we're depressed and broken
- fractured. We're neutered, and then kept dependant; they
maintain their charmed resplendence.

It's all about autonomy, and how they covet it, you see? Aliens
(the craft they fly) show cleaner ways to do things, Clyde! We
might stop with fossil fuels, and package food with stuff
reused. This information we'd obtain contributes to our freedoms
gain; we shouldn't want to cheat and steal; folks deserve a
better deal. But they would have us on their meter, (Tesla might
have done it sweeter), paying taxes that provide... the
corporate welfare I decry.

We're not kept abreast of things that complicates the toil of
kings. These are kings too arbitrary, rule of law's to them
contrary. They infest the institutions, make the rules and
constitutions, use them as their mechanisms, vehicles for canted
schisms. They preclude autonomy; they'll treat you like an
enemy; using 'letters' like a club, they'll obfuscate the
issues, bub. Anything can hide in there, where 'letters' work
toward despair. People's interests are a joke if crossing what
those "chosen" hope.

NASA is a strange pretender - the CIA a black contender; the FBI
we've just considered (hope and pray that we're delivered).
Don't forget the NSA as you can bet they've feet of clay! These
have kept us in the dark; they're 'letters' aping eel and shark.
All our armies have their shops; they have their share of black
op cops. The OSI and GAO play cards precluding what we'd know.
The SAT and ICI just muddy water - cloud your sky. The SBI and
OSS, well, we can't know... . It's _your_ best guess!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

The NSA was an agency approved specifically and justified only
to accomplish the following. Created in 1952 to house and
consolidate all the other agencies, bureaus, and intelligence
shops, it was conceived to facilitate oversight, engender
accountability, and save money... protect the garden variety
American from the military industrial complex that Eisenhower
passionately warned us about... futilely.

The new umbrella agency was created... but not a single other
agency was dissolved. Their number only increased. Additionally,
there is inadequate... no, I'm sorry, I mean... NO oversight,
and there is more money spent now than there ever was -
sinisterly augmented by an unknown but certainly considerable
factor. Regarding the FBI, well, it's always written a check its
ass couldn't cash, and it has improved little since its first
director used it to make himself an arbitrary king in this land
where there are not supposed to be ANY kings... by LAW.

...God, but what must hide in some of those black vaults!

Somebody knows.


~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND - John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is - the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                       International UFO Research Day

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 09:22:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:51:39 -0400
Subject: International UFO Research Day


Hi!

On June 24 we celebrate The International UFO Research Day. As
part of the program we will scan the sky for UFOs. If you like
to participate visit:

http://www.ovni.net/noticias/ufo_day.html


Dr. Virgilio Snchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
Chupacabras
http://ufomiami.homestead.com/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                     Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 06:52:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:53:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Did You Make The List? - Hatch


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:56:04 -0700

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 21:53:23 -0000

 >>>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Did You Make The List?
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:14:15 -0700

 >>>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:24:19 -0500
 >>>>To: UFO Updates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
 >>>>Subject: Did You Make The List?

 >>Shucks, Royce, you don't even rate a "psychic shield." That
 >>appears to be the moral equivalent of a Distinguished Flying
 >>Cross.

 >>Dick Hall, D.F.C., P.S.

 >I bow my head in shame... <sniffle>...and marvel at your
 >greatness.....


Dear Royce:

At least you rated a mention! Kylgor from planet Herpes (or
whatever) had the good taste to make no mention of the *U* UFO
Database whatsoever in spite of the recommendations of my fat
sister and other notables.

I find one consistent thread in this. To wit: Flakes hate data.
Flakes want marks, not facts. I have yet to ship a copy of *U*
to a single new-age type for example.

Oh sure, there are credulous sorts etc. who bought the odd copy,
and others I politely disagree with. I even sold a few to
outspoken skeptics, something I am rather proud of oddly enough.

There are lots of good catalogs out there, the the compilers of
same might note one salient fact in all this: You and your hard
honest work is virtually invisible to the airhead.

Rejoice. Who needs them?

Now, back to the vodka bottle. [ beer got hot in a 650
milli-second power brownout.] and best wishes to all as usual.


- 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:53:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:54:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 20:44:34 -0500

 >A whole lot of questions asked here, by individuals unfamiliar
 >with Bill Weitzel's commendably thorough investigation for
 >NICAP. Since Weitzel's long report has never been published...

That might explain why it's not well-known.

 >>When did Spaur first speak of this insignia?

 >In a newspaper interview cited in my entry.

I'll look at that evidence.

 >>Did he later admit it only existed in his dreams, or is that
 >>purely conjecture, simply because Weitzel didn't note having
 >>seen the same insignia?

 >"Admit" is a strange verb here. Spaur had nothing to "admit,"
 >which - in typical debunker smear...

Thanks, I win a bet that you couldn't comment on my
straightforward questions without reading something sinister
into them, using the word 'debunker' and trying to be insulting
in your reply.

 >It's depressing to see believers' careless use of Spaur's
 >testimony being continued in its own way by equally careless
 >debunkers...

I should have gone for 'more than once'.

 >Typical, though.

Was that the intended insult?

 >>Was Spaur's partner, Deputy Sheriff Neff ever asked about the
 >>insignia and if so, what were his comments?

 >A really, really dumb question. See above.

Ah no, there it is!

So predictable and a testimony to many things.

The question was obviously asked as the background to Spaur's
insignia wasn't known, which is why I was asking about it in the
first place, but I guess you had already figured that out.


Of infinitely more significance, presumably someone can clarify
the different stories about 'Floyd' being intercepted by the
USAF and whether Spaur claimed to have seen it again on another
night, etc.


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                         Re: Talk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 10:07:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:56:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500


Dennis,

 >>You are a charitable man, my friend. Condon and Blue
 >>Book could have used you in their p.r. offices. Maybe
 >>you'd be so persuasive that we'd actually end up grateful
 >>for lousy, dishonest explanations of UFO reports.

 >Last time I looked, no one was talking about Condon and Blue Book.

No, of course not. We all know that ufology is the beginning and
end of all evil, and it's not polite to mention the high crimes
and misdemeanors of debunkers and pelicanists. I just don't know
what got into me.

 >>>Of course, there was an alternative. The Air Force could have
 >>>said, "Well, to tell the truth, we think these people are, uh
 >>>liars, or, if you prefer, simply exaggerators."

 >>What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
 >>its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
 >>or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
 >>advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
 >>for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

 >And no one will ever match you for your reading of the AF
 >report... What is cynical about not calling people liars, which
 >would have only invited lawsuits? Did you think the AF was
 >stoopid, too?

Huh? What lawsuits? Can you cite a single instance in which the
Air Force or Blue Book was sued for calling an alleged UFO
witness a liar? Talk about cynicism -- maybe you _are_ even more
cynical than the AF. Ufologists get slammed for just about
anything they do, but you just can't bring yourself to criticize
the Air Force, can you, even when it uses bogus testimony to
support a ludicrous theory, or when you have to contrive a weird
and lame rationalization for its behavior?

 >But, wait a minute, you say ufology has debunked these accounts
 >of bodies (after being the first to promote them). So, what is
 >it, exactly, that the Air Force is guilty of in _this_ report -
 >not admitting that they actually have bodies?

Ah, yes, ufology: the beginning and end of all evil, including
Roswell. "Promote" is a good pelicanist word.  In fact,
ufologists collected testimony -- some of it still intriguing,
some of it from witnesses who, to all appearances, are telling
the truth as they see it, some of it from witnesses whom
ufologists eventually identified as liars -- from persons who
had been privately reporting Roswell-crash experiences to family
members and close friends. I can only infer that if it were up
to you, ufologists wouldn't investigate -- oh, excuse me,
"promote" -- anything that doesn't meet with Stacy's approval.

Let me repeat, since the point continues to elude you:

The AF is guilty of using suspect and bogus testimony to advance
an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Why is it so hard
for you to imagine that somebody might legitimately object to
that? I will give the AF credit for one thing: by implicitly
acknowledging that the testimony about bodies needed addressing,
it conceded that the question is a legitimate one, even if the
answer it provided is not.

 >>And what would have stopped the AF from charging that the
 >>informants were hoaxers? That never stopped Blue Book, which
 >>didn't hesitate to call witnesses hoaxers whether they were or
 >>not.

 >There you go bringing up Blue Book again.

Well, excuse the hell out of my sense of historical precedent.

 >Quintanilla didn't even call Zamora a hoaxer, though he probably
 >would have liked to. But we weren't talking about past AF
 >history, until you brought it up (thereby acting as if I was an
 >apologist for everything they've done or haven't done regarding
 >UFOs, when I was addressing a specific instance, and a specific
 >instance only. Sorry, but that brush won't tar.)

Lt. Col. Q certainly implied it after he retired, as you should
know from the excerpt from his memoir you published in The
Anomalist. One person who openly accused Zamora of hoaxing was
the Big Pelican himself, Phil Klass. I don't recall Zamora's
threatening to sue him. Come to think of it, I don't recall that
-- though the BP has accused any number of UFO reporters of
hoaxing -- Klass has been sued by anybody. I don't recall that
anybody ever sued Blue Book after being called a hoaxer. So on
what in the world do you base your strange claim that the AF
feared lawsuits if it called Roswell claimants liars? Or did you
just make that up?

 >Simple question: do you think they currently have in their
possession >alien bodies from Roswell, given that ufologists
have debunked so many >alleged Roswell "witnesses" who claim
that they do?

I have no idea. I do know that the theory "they" (I presume you
mean the Air Force, which is an "it") proposed about crash-test
dummies is nonsense.

 >If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
 >say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
 >Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
 >Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
 >Answer? They can't.

Yeah, it's that pesky sense of history that just keeps me
skeptical about the AF, not to mention its lame claims about
Roswell.

 >>>BTW, wasn't there also a GAO investigation of Roswell? Remember
 >>>reading _anything_ favorable about its conclusions in the UFO
 >>>press?

 >>Uh, do ufologists have some obligation, unlike other citizens,
 >>to praise government actions mindlessly and endorse official
 >>conclusions unthinkingly? Ufologists quite rightly were
 >>unsatisfied and/or suspicious, given the long, sorry history of
 >>government mishandling of UFO issues.

 >Well, that's being objective, ain't it?

It's called learning from history, a practice in which, I am
afraid, you are profoundly uninterested.

 >>>Just checked the Index of the 2nd ed. of your UFO Encyclopedia
 >>>and didn't see either General Accounting Office or Steven Schiff
 >>>listed.

 >>Huh? What does this have to do with anything? In any event,
 >>you're wrong. The GAO is mentioned on page 266 of the second
 >>edition. What's your point, anyway?

 >What it has to do with anything, Jerry, is this: yours is a UFO
 >encyclopedia, Roswell is an important UFO case. The AF report
 >and the GAO report are UFO news and history. (I shouldn't be
 >having to explain this.)

Thank you for pointing out that I have written a UFO encyclopedia.
Roswell is covered on pages 264-67. The index has 26 citations
for it.


 >But I'll take you at your word. Since the AF didn't admit to
 >recovering alien bodies at Roswell that can mean one thing and
 >one thing only: They recovered alien bodies at Roswell.

Thank you for that brilliant display of logic. What you've done
is underscore a point I made on this List just yesterday: that
human beings will go to any lengths to say, "We don't know."

Apparently, it is inconceivable to you that a middle position
between equally uncritical belief and uncritical disbelief is possible.
  As I have said more than once and will repeat yet again for your
benefit, it is my view that the full truth about what did or did not
happen at Roswell is, barring some unexpected development,
essentially unrecoverable. Moreover, the conclusion any individual
comes to is entirely dependent on which evidence he considers
significant and which he chooses to discard. Consequently, no
theory about what happened at Roswell is provable; every one,
without exception, has problems. Therefore, for all practical
purposes, Roswell is a useless case. That is why I seldom discuss
it and why I did not write a huge entry on the subject in the
encyclopedia.

 >And I'll make this simple, too. The GAO conducted a Roswell
 >investigation contemporaneous with the AF. I had asked you what
 >your opinion of the former was, whether you held it in the same
 >contempt and disregard as the AF report?

No. Nor, unlike you apparently, do I consider it the final word.

 >>>Anyway, I look forward to ufology's reviews of Pflock's Roswell:
 >>>Incon- venient Facts and the Will to Believe.

 >>The first will be in IUR, I believe the very next issue of same.

 >Like I said, I look forward to it, too, which is more than I can
 >say of most UFO journals these days. A review of another
 >publication I was looking forward to in the IUR never appeared.
 >Hopefully, this one will. And hopefully, it won't be authored by
 >someone named Carey, Galganski or Schmitt.

Yeah, they're just not as objective as you, are they? All they've done
is actively investigate the case, unlike you or me, so obviously they
have nothing to contribute.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                           Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lowe

From: Adam Lowe <nicap@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 16:51:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:58:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Lowe


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:03:59 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Easton

 >The presentation at:

 >http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/portage.htm

 >has a link to, "Ravenna, Ohio, RECORD-COURIER Article, April 18,
 >1966". Unfortunately the link doesn't work.

Hi everyone.

I've checked the NICAP site and the link does work. The link is
only to an image of the newspaper article not a transcript of
the article. The url for the image is below.

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/raven18.gif

If there are further problems accessing it I will try reposting
it.

Adam.














   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:35:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:59:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Sparks


 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:14:22 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 01:11:59 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>>Here's a snippet from Spaur's own words:

 >>>"It's about fifty feet across,

 >>How did he determine this? A mystery object at an unknown
 >>distance and he knew it's size? I don't think so. But, if he
 >>assumed that it was this size and at a distance as he was
 >>chasing it, he might have followed Venus for 80 miles into the
 >>next state.

 >>>and I can just make out a dome or
 >>>something on the top, but that's very dark. The bottom is real
 >>>bright; it's putting out a beam of light that makes a big spot
 >>>underneath. It's like it's sitting on the beam.

 >>Classic Venus, sparkling in the early morning skies to a witness
 >>who thinks it's a real object a few miles away. The dome is a
 >>slightly astigmatic image of the planet and the beam it's
 >>sitting on is caused by diffraction of the image by his
 >>eyelashes.

 >Classic Venus or 'Klassic stretch'?

 >>>It was overhead
 >>>a minute ago, and it was as bright as day here: Our headlights
 >>>didn't make nearly as much light as it did. And this is no
 >>>helicopter or anything like that; it's perfectly still and it
 >>>just makes a humming noise." [2]
<snip>

 >>>From the transcript with Quintanilla it's obvious that during
 >>>parts of the chase, the object is at a low altitude and passes
 >>>over several other police cars.

 >>The unknown object, of unknown size, and hence unknown distance,
 >>was of course assumed to have passed over those in front. Hell,
 >>it was 50 feet across, remember, and they chased it four more
 >>than an hour and never caught up to it?

This is contextual distance determination: By passing over
objects of known size (police cars) at known distances (the
police cars) the size and distance to the unknown (the UFO)
becomes known.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                          Easton Threatens Lawsuit

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:30:08 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:01:43 -0400
Subject: Easton Threatens Lawsuit


In a private communication received today, James Easton has
threatened me (and two other parties) with a lawsuit for alleged
"defamation" in regard to criticism of his position on the
Socorro case as posted on the NICAP web site.

I think the List should know of the depths to which debunkers
sometimes will sink when you disagree with their statements.
Nothing I said is even remotely personal or actionable, and I
strongly stand by what I said.

This is very reminiscent of an incident a couple of years ago
when Gary Posner, barely noted CSICOP debunker, threatened me
with a lawsuit after I publicly (knowingly in his presence)
criticized CSICOP's unscientific behavior.

Bluff and bluster and attempted intimidation are the hallmarks
of people who are losing the argument and are trying to strike
back at their 'tormentors'.


Dick Hall








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                             A 16th Century Disc

From: Chris Aubeck <caubeck@email.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:02:26 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:02:42 -0400
Subject: A 16th Century Disc


Hello List Members,

I have been collecting very old accounts of disc-shaped (or
similar) UFOs for some time. My aim is to challenge the popular
myth that saucer-shaped UFOs were not reported before Arnold's
sighting of (ironically non- circular) mysterious craft in 1947.
So far I have gathered an interesting number of cases, and I'm
sure many list members will be aware of a few themselves.

I have noticed that one particular account is barely known in
ufology, and may not appear in English publications in this
field at all. Therefore I would like to reproduce it here.

In "Viajes al Estrecho de Magallanes" by Pedro Sarmiento de
Gamboa (c.1530-1592)we read of this navegator's travels to the
Strait of Magellan in 1579 y 1581. On February 7th 1580 at 1:00
am, he wrote that towards the south-southeast

"vimos salir de la mar una cosa redonda bermeja como fuego, como
una (a)darga, que iba subiendo por cielo o viento. Sobre un
monte alto se prolong y estando como una lanza alta sobre el
monte, se hizo como media luna entre bermeja y blanca. Las
figuras eran de esta manera:"

which in English would read

"we saw emerge from the sea a round thing, red like fire, like a
shield, that rose up on the air or on the wind. It became longer
as it went over a mountain and, in the form of a lance high
above the mount, its shape became like a half-moon between red
and white in colour. The shapes were like this:"

The three simple shapes accompanying the text are a circle, an
oval and a half-moon.

Sarmiento de Gamboa compares the object to an "adarga." This was
a round, oval or heart-shaped shield used in the times of Don
Quijote. A picture of one can be found at:

http://alamo-deparras.welkin.org/history/hispanic_period/parras/militaria/shield
.html

Shields in the sky were reported in Roman times, too. If anyone
has anything to add (or wants a go at explaining this 16th
century case) I'd appreciate the feedback.


Chris Aubeck

Translation (c) C. Aubeck 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                          Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:07:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


  >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 01:34:21 EDT
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

 >>>Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:00:19 EDT
 >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>To our knowledge there was no codeword access controls on
 >>Bluebook. If such a liason existed, the person doing the liason
 >>would have to hold a clearance compatabile with that group
 >>(MJ-12) or organization. Just because they had such a clearance
 >>and or sat in on meetings doesn't mean that they could wholesale
 >>transfer files and documents that were properly AF classified to
 >>an outside group or organization.

 >>The point being is just because Bluebook was a very public
 >>program does not preclude the possibility that a highly
 >>classified program was also doing UFO work and working along
 >>with and or using Bluebook.

 >>I would point out (just about the time the wolves are howling)
 >>that I am not saying that MJ-12 is real or that the EBD is real.

 >Robert - excellent post.

 >Bluebook head Ed Ruppelt did allude to a parallel
 >highly-secretive UFO investigative group or groups several times
 >in his tattle-tale insider book.

Dave,

Thanks for the fascinating post. However, Ruppelt's allusions
are not to MJ-12-type groups (as I will point out below) and
they don't prove that Project Blue Book itself was a TS Codeword
compartmented organization which could have denied an MJ-12
Committee member such as Menzel access to its files. The
original argument was over whether Menzel could have been on the
MJ-12 Committee which purportedly controlled UFO information and
policy in the U.S. and then be denied access to BB files
especially if MJ-12 according to the (bogus) EBD of Nov 18,
1952, had "liason" [sic!! dumbbell misppelling] with the head of
BB just for the obvious reason stated in the Eisenhower Briefing
Document (p. 5):

   "A need for as much additional information as possible about
   these craft, their performance characteristics and their
   purpose led to the undertaking known as U.S. Air Force Project
   SIGN in December, 1947.... The operation is currently being
   conducted under the code name BLUE BOOK, with liason [sic!!]
   maintained through the Air Force officer who is head of the
   project [Ruppelt]."

Clearly purported MJ-12 Committee member Menzel needed
"additional information" on UFO's and tried to get it from the
very project set up by MJ-12 or through its recommendation,
Project BLUE BOOK, through the very person designated as
"liason" [sic] to MJ-12 for the satisfaction of MJ-12's "need
for as much additional information as possible" on UFO's and
that person (Ruppelt) denied MJ-12 Committee member Menzel
access. This would be a violation of BLUE BOOK's charter or very
reason for existence under the description given the MJ-12 EBD
(if the MJ-12 scenario wasn't fraudulent and a pack of lies).
Again this is damning evidence that EBD is fraudulent and that
Menzel was never a member of its MJ-12 Committee controlling all
UFO information and policymaking.

In a sentence I omitted from the EBD quote above for reasons of
clarity in reference to BLUE BOOK, it states that: "In order to
preserve security, liason [sic!!] between SIGN and Majestic-12
was limited to two individuals within the Intelligence Division
of Air Materiel Command whose role was to pass along certain
types of information through channels." Clearly, MJ-12's purpose
was to have a lower security project collecting less sensitive
UFO information, such as from ordinary military channels and
from the public, and then "pass along" specific intelligence
data to MJ-12 according to intelligence requirements established
by MJ-12. Yet, this project as "currently ... conducted" through
BLUE BOOK through its head, Ruppelt, who was supposed to be the
current "liason" responsible to "pass along" intelligence on
UFO's to MJ-12 was refusing to do so with MJ-12 Committee member
Menzel, and in fact tried to get Menzel hauled up on charges.
Why couldn't Menzel just go to the MJ-12 Committee and have
Ruppelt's decision reversed? Why didn't the EBD note in its
purported briefing to President-elect Eisenhower that MJ-12 was
having difficulties obtaining UFO information from the BLUE BOOK
project/channel it had set up? (Answer: The hoaxer didn't know
or didn't think about Ruppelt's refusal of Menzel as a
contradiction to the phony MJ-12 scenario.)

In that densest concentration of outrageously impossible and
anachronistic frauds ever concocted in the UFO field to date,
the MJ-12 1st Annual Report, it clearly states (Annex B, p. 10):

   "Upon the creation of the MAJESTIC TWELVE GROUP by special
   executive order dated 24 September 1947, and given powers of
   authority by PDD/I-1 [sic], dated 26 September 1947, the Panel
   was empowered to convene and conduct a review of all available
   evidence and data collected by government and military
   intelligence agencies."


Clearly, MJ-12 was "empowered" to review _"all"_ UFO data
collected by the government, which obviously must include a
low-level operation such as BLUE BOOK that was set up for the
very purpose of funneling such data to MJ-12. Yet the Ruppelt
refusal of Menzel stands in stark contradiction to this phony
scenario. (BTW, the PDD's or Presidential Decision Directives,
was a series of national security policy directives established
by Clinton on Jan 20, 1993, and didn't exist in 1947. This is
just one of scores possibly hundreds of impossible anachronisms
in the "1st Annual Report," which in itself is a stupid blunder
in designation since that cover page clearly contains obsolete
1947/8 info intermingled with the 1948 title, and with 1951 CIA
DCI report numbering, and 1951-2 agencies that didn't exist
before or after, and a stupid reference to a 1954 date frame.)

 >E.g., in Chapter 3 ("The Classics"), Ruppelt talks about the
 >infamous, top-secret Estimate of the Situation that Gen.
 >Vandenberg rejected, leading to the eventual demise of Project
 >Sign and Sign's interplanetary hypothesis. At the end of the
 >chapter Ruppelt wrote:

Query: If MJ-12 set up Project SIGN in the first place or was
instrumental in its creation, as the EBD claims, then why was
SIGN allowed by MJ-12 and its MJ-12 Committee member Vandenberg
to risk exposing the entire scheme by pushing forward the TS
Estimate of the Situation in the first place? Why was it
rejected by MJ-12 Committee member Vandenberg if MJ-12 was in
control and could simply have had it tabled without rejecting it
outright? Couldn't MJ-12 member Vandenberg have simply quietly
worked behind the scenes to squelch it all before it came to a
head?

 >"By the end of 1948, Project Sign had received several
 >hundred UFO reports.... Even though the UFO reports were
 >getting better and more numerous, the enthusiasm over the
 >interplanetary idea was cooling off.... More and more work
 >was being pushed off onto the OTHER INVESTIGATIVE
 >ORGANIZATION that was helping ATIC..."

 >Hmmmmm......

This "other investigative organization" was Air Force OSI, the
files for which are now with BB files in the National Archives,
and which can be found overlapped with SIGN and GRUDGE files.
Not some secret MJ-12 cabal.

 >Moving forward to Chapter 8 on the Lubbock Lights, Ruppelt wrote
 >toward chapter's end:

 >"The only other people outside Project Blue Book who have
 >studied the complete case of the Lubbock Lights were A GROUP
 >WHO, DUE TO THEIR ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE GOVERNMENT, HAD
 >COMPLETE ACCESS TO OUR FILES. And these people were not pulp
 >writers or wide-eyed fanatics, THEY WERE SCIENTISTS, ROCKET
 >EXPERTS, NUCLEAR PHYSICISTS, AND INTELLIGENCE EXPERTS. They
 >had banded together to study our UFO reports because they
 >were convinced that some of the UFO's that were being
 >reported were interplanetary spacships and the Lubbock series
 >was one of these reports...."

 >Who were these "scientists, rocket experts, nuclear physicists,
 >and intelligence experts" with "complete access to our files?"
 >That sounds like the description of an MJ-12 type organization
 >if I ever heard one.

Sorry, it's the CIA Office of Scientific Intelligence's
Robertson Panel review group that visited Blue Book on Dec 12,
1952. Rocket expert - Durant. Nuclear physicist - Robertson.
Intelligence expert - Chadwell, head of CIA/OSI.

 >Here's the beginning of Chapter 12 on the Washington DC
 >radar/visuals of 1952:

 >"A few days prior to the incident, A SCIENTIST, FROM AN AGENCY
 >THAT I CAN'T NAME, and I were talking about the build-up of
 >reports along the east coast of the United States. From his
 >study of the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force
 >Headquarters, and from discussions with his colleages, he said
 >he though that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of
 >loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days they're going
 >to blow up and you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO
 >sightings. The sighting will occur in Washington or New York,'
 >he predicted, --'probably Washington.'"

 >Somebody besides the Air Force was obviously paying a lot of
 >attention to the situation.

Nope, for reasons I can't get into here, this was a scientist
from AF Intelligence.

 >Then there are the Wilbert Smith papers. Smith's memo to the
 >Canadian Dept. of Transport on Nov 21, 1950 following a briefing
 >with Dr. Robert Sarbacher in Washington stated: "The matter
 >[flying saucers] is the most highly clasified subject in the
 >United States Government, rating higher than even the H-bomb...
 >Their modus operandi is unknown but concentrated effort is being
 >made by A SMALL GROUP HEADED BY DOCTOR VANNEVAR BUSH."

Bush was a life-long enemy of rocketry and space travel. He
impeded and obstructed the Manhattan Project during WWII. His
testimony before Congress in Dec 1945 criticizing ICBM's led to
the cancellation of our Atlas ICBM program. In 1960 he was still
publicly opposing space travel long after his retirement. He was
hardly the kind of forward-looking scientist to lead the charge
on ET's.

 >Tracked down 30+ years later, Sarbarcher wrote William Steinman
 >the following: "John von Neuman was definitely involved. Dr.
 >Vannevar Bush was definitely involved, and I think Robert
 >Oppenheimer also."

 >Also fingered by Sarbacher as being involved in briefings at
 >Wright-Patterson was Dr. Eric Walker (President of Penn State
 >University and former head of the Dept. of Electrical
 >Engineering and Dean of Engineering and Architecture). Walker
 >also served as Executive Secretary of the Research and
 >Development Board from 1950 to 1952. The RDB was the brainchild
 >of Bush to continue defense-related research and development and
 >came into being. Lloyd Berkner, another alleged MJ-12 member was
 >Bush's first Executive Secretary (also a member of the CIA's
 >infamous Robertson Panel in 1953).

I seem to recall that Walker when interviewed in the 80's was
spouting all kinds of wild conspiracy theories and claims -
JFK?, Nazis ? I think it's in a Hesemann book.

 >Another member of the RDB who independently named Bush, Berkner,
 >von Neumann, and Walker as either probably or definitely
 >involved was Dr. Fred Darwin, who was the RDB's Executive
 >Director of the Guided Missile Committee from 1949 to 1954.
 >>William Steinman interviewed Walker by phone in 1987. According
 >to Steinman's transcript of his phone conversation, Walker
 >initially admitted to attending meetings of the RDB "concerning
 >the military recovery of flying saucers and the bodies of
 >occupants" around 1950. When Steinman brought up the subject of
 >MJ-12, Steinman said Walker's reply was, "Yes, I know of MJ-12.
 >I have known of them for 40 years."

That would be before Walker served on the RDB in 1950-2. We have
to rely on Steinman's memory and interpretations since there is
no transcript and Steinman may have read his own knowledge into
it.

 >(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
 >conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

 >Other of Smith's papers pointed to Bush and the RDB as having
 >some central role in UFO investigations and control of
 >information. E.g., Donald Keyhoe had spoken to Smith about his
 >theories of UFO propulsion and proposed doing a True Magazine
 >article on it. Although Smith didn't think much of Keyhoe's
 >handling of the material, he had plenty to say about who would
 >give final approval to the publication of such an article.

If RDB had such a central role in controlling UFO investigations
why did RDB relinquish its intelligence functions to CIA's OSI
in Jan 1949?

 >In a memo dated Nov. 24, 1950 to Dr. O. M. Solandt, Chairman of
 >the Canadian Defense Research Board, Smith wrote, "...the
 >publication of this material, if _permitted by the United States
 >Research and Development Board_, would be in the public
 >interest."

 >Why would permission be needed from the US RDB for Keyhoe to
 >publish his article? Where did they get the authority to veto a
 >magazine article by a private individual in a country with a
 >supposedly free press?

 >On Jan. 3, 1951, Smith wrote a letter to Gordon Cox of the
 >Canadian Embassy in Washington (who had arranged for the
 >Sarbacher interview a few months letter). In the letter Smith
 >wrote, "I have heard nothing further in regard to the Keyhoe
 >article... I imagine that it has long since been returned to the
 >Canadian Embassy in Washington after which I understand _Keyhoe
 >was to take it to Doctor Bush for clearance_.

 >Again, why would Keyhoe need "clearance" from Bush to publish
 >some dumb flying saucer article?

 >Further, Cox wrote back to Smith a few days later and said, "The
 >article was returned to Keyhoe ... and he has not seen it since
 >nor has he heard anything from Bush or what Bush did."

 >When I see documentation like this, it's clear that Bush and the
 >RDB were very deeply involved in highly secretive UFO research
 >and control of any information on the subject. Whether the
 >central control group was called MJ-12 or something else is
 >almost a side issue.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                     Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:36:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:13:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Sandow


 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:33:30 +0200

 >Once again, refering to my comments to Mr. Sandow (Re: 2001. A
 >Space Odyssey - in Gray), the witness did not described big,
 >black, slanted eyes; instead they looked like fetal eyes. But
 >this is another story.


Luis,

It's fascinating to follow the various alien types described by
alleged witnesses. And obviously it's important to know exactly
when the standard gray description emerged. It's important, too,
to acknowledge that most early witnesses didn't describe
standard grays (though they agreed, most of the time, on small
humanoids).

But did you see my reply to your Travis Walton/2001 post? Walton
certainly didn't say his aliens had normal eyes. He didn't
describe big-eyed grays, but found the eyes of his aliens
striking, unusual, and even (if I remember his quote correctly)
frightening.


Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:44:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:14:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Sandow


 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:02:44 +0200

 >Angela Thompson is the 17th person visited by the Grays inside
 >Hopkins's house! And, what has he done, at least, to try to
 >catch _them_ in the act? Absolutely nothing. What kind of
 >investigator is he?


If it happened in your house, what would you do?

Serious question.

Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 16:36:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:18:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000

 >>Bless Jim, but here's the proverbial rub. Like most of ufology,
 >>99.9% of his data was in anecdotal form. There is little that a
 >>scientific investigation of, say, the Father Gill case can do
 >>after the fact, except to say, "interesting, if true."

 >Dennis,

 >Jim McDonald proved what you are saying here to be untrue. By
 >vigorous investigation he was able to pin down a lot of facts,
 >check weather conditions, stars and planets, etc., in many
 >important cases. He searched out additional witnesses and
 >conducted careful interrogations. Good scientific work.


Dick,

I hope we're not slipping into semantics here. Maybe I should
have worded it this way: There is little that a scientific
re-investigation of the Father Gill and many similar cases could
add to what Mc Donald (and others) have already said about them.
This is, in part, because the anecdotal data of a UFO report
typically outweighs any actual instrumentation of same.

By way of another example, what could conceivably be concluded
by a re-investigation of, say, the Coyne case that would allow
anything to be scientifically concluded that hasn't already been
concluded or suggested by ufology? There is nothing there that
_physical_ scientists can investigate except witness testimony,
which is not the purvey of the physical sciences.

You can do a little theorizing with some of the EM-effect cases,
but not much, because, once again, in the main, actual
instrumentation is missing. Science likes to do stuff, but, for
the most part, there is little that you can actually _do_ with
the UFO data. You can sort it and turn it into statistics, but
you can't do much predictive with it, never mind applied
science. The problem is not so much re-investigating old,
largely anecdotal data, I think you would agree, as acquiring
new data, preferably instrumented on more than one level.

 >I know, it doesn't prove ET. But it does prove that we have a
 >consistent and patterned unexplained phenomenon.

It may indicate or suggest, but all it proves is that we have a
lot of reports of same. We have a lot of reports of ghosts, too,
but it's damnably difficult to determine what they actually
prove.

 >>Now, let me backtrack. Actually, the world grows more
 >>electronically wired every day in ways that should let us
 >>monitor UFO activity as it happens -- assuming the numbers some
 >>ufologists promulgate. Weather radar, commercial "spy"
 >>satellites, and so on. Theoretically, UFO sightings should be
 >>greatly on the increase as a consequence. There are two other
 >>consequences that need considering in this vein, too. One, as
 >>the world continues to be increasingly surveilled in all sorts
 >>of spectra, electromagnetic, visual, etc., the less the power
 >>any imagined cover up entity could conceivably wield. Two,
 >>science should be arguably logging this data on their own, w/o
 >>any reference to present day ufology or UFO wars of the past.
 >>There is no particular indication that this is happening.

 >Ah, but there is! I think we've been around this block before,
 >but your clear position statement allows pertinent comment. You
 >seem to believe (rather naively, in my opinion) that if
 >scientific instruments, FAA radar, etc. were picking up UFOs
 >regularly or even sporadically that the sighters would routinely
 >make public reports on same. It just doesn't happen that way.
 >The fear of ridicule by colleagues is a powerful force for
 >information suppression.

I didn't say anything about public reports, if, by public, you
mean going to the press and saying, "I'm not sure, but I think I
just saw a UFO." What I'm talking about is entirely different.
I'm talking about data detected during the daily course of
affairs, while looking for something else. This is how sprites
were discovered, for example, while monitoring ordinary
lightning. This happened by a team of scientific observers
"routinely" recording data that went against the grain, not a
discovery made by an individual who had to face censure or
ridicule from his colleagues. This sort of team activity
transpires daily, and in terms of magnitude greater than the
sort of civilian surveillance of the atmosphere and near space,
visual and otherwise, that took place only a decade or two ago.

The sprite team got data, analyzed it, repeated the process by
gathering additional evidence, and then published their findings
in a scientific journal. That's how science works. You seem to
think scientists are mindless sheep, when the history of
scientific breakthroughs (and quite a few failures, too) is
littered with maverick personalities, the Kerry guy who
discovered how to replicate DNA (for which he won the Nobel
Prize), being but a recent prominent example. He tells in his
autobiography of meeting an alien disguised as a raccoon. Pretty
timid sheep!

Again, most scientific monitoring and data collecting is a team,
not an individual, affair. Two more recent examples: a team of U
of Arizona astrophysicists asked for, and received, classified
NORAD data for a study for a study of incoming space objects.
The result was a book indicating that they were both larger and
more numerous than previously thought. Louis Frank is another,
if I have his name right, who analyzed IRAS (?) satellite data
and discovered we were being impacted by many more comets
annually than previously thought. It now appears he may be
right. And guess what? He had to overcome the opposition of
numerous colleagues within his field, which he did by getting
his data in a row. He got instrumentation which, while it may
not have proved his ultimate hypothesis, did eventually cause
colleagues to rethink their own positions, including our
existing scientific knowledge of how comets "work."

I admit that scientists are human. But that merely means that
for every scientist cowed by the mainstream establishment, there
is another looking to make his or her name. Maybe not on a one
to one ratio, admittedly, but the mavericks are out there,
nonetheless.


 >Speculation on my part? Not exactly. Ask anyone who has
 >investigated UFOs for a long period of time, and they will tell
 >you of their personal knowledge of many such suppressed cases. I
 >recall that within the past year or so, several such cases have
 >been reported belatedly in the MUFON UFO Journal, typically
 >anonymously by request, but I'm sure Dwight isn't making them
 >up.

Yes, and they'll tell you of their anonymous government
informants and highly-placed secret sources, too. Just out of
curiosity, how often did McDonald hint of anonymous sources?


 >Nor is "science" so monolithic. In the case of UFOs, many
 >scientists and technicians are more like scared rabbits worried
 >about their livelihoods, which we can't blame them for given the
 >proclivities of their scoffing colleagues who don't bother to
 >study the data. "Science" doesn't sit around monitoring the
 >skies for UFOs (unless there is a secret Government project
 >doing that), and when something anomalous occurs, the "safe"
 >path is to assume that it is an observational error of some sort
 >and to trash the data. This is exactly what was done with
 >anomalous observations by Project Moonwatch years ago, as one
 >example.

Science doesn't have to sit around monitoring the skies for
UFOs; the latter would be incidental to other observations,
which are now taking place in quantities that could only have
been imagined a decade or two ago. It's naive on your part to
think that ridicule rules like some sort of fail-safe security,
or cover up, blanket. _Can_ it have an impact? No doubt. Is it
guaranteed to keep the "truth" -- whatever that is -- covered up
from everyone? No way.

In fact, there is no particularly necessary reason that any such
acquired data would have to be associated with, or identified
as, UFOs in the sense that you and I are talking about them
here, ie, as potential ET craft. Where is that unwritten rule?
The ridicule factor could easily be averted by any scientist(s)
interested enough to give it serious thought. But I forget:
they're mostly sheared sheep.

 >>Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
 >>science would just come over here and take an honest look at
 >>what we've got, things would change. This totally ignores the
 >>fact that science _should_ be detecting this stuff on its own,
 >>coming to us, and asking, "wow, look what we got here! Got
 >>anything like that in your database?" Again, _if_ UFO events
 >>were as common and profligate as much of ufology insists they
 >>are.

 >Count me "provincial" and in complete disagreement with your
 >idealistic view of "open-minded," freely communicating
 >scientists.

So counted, although I didn't say anything about "open-minded,"
freely communicating scientists. For all I care, they could be
greedy and glory-bound. The part about them coming to us may be
idealistic rhetoric, but the point remains: _If_ the UFO
phenomenon was as common and pervasive as ufology maintains it
is, they would be routinely, repeat, routinely instrumenting it
in the course of their own growing monitoring and documentation
of geographic, atmospheric, and near-space phenomena.

 >>That science isn't, is some sort of an answer in itself, whether
 >>one agrees with it or not. Most ufologists don't -- and won't.

 >>Just as most ufologists will never sanction a Congressional or
 >>scientific investigation of the UFO data -- _unless it arrives
 >>at the conclusions they've already reached_.

 >"Most ufologists." Department of arbitrarily generated
 >statistics? Most ufologists of my acquaintance would cheerfully
 >support an open, honest, thoroughgoing scientific investigation,
 >which has never happened and may never happen.

And would this same most agree if the conclusions of same turned
out to be different from their own? Or would they say, what did
you expect of another non-thoroughgoing "investigation"?

Actually, I got that "most" from the same body of statistics you
used when referring to "most" scientists and technicians as
deferring to the overwhelming, omnipresent UFO Ridicule Factor,
or UFORF.  Check!

Anyway, I always thought the U of Colorado Report was a pretty
good attempt at same, once you got past Condon's introductory
remarks and the AF's later gloss on same.

 >>I do not want to be seen as a debunker of the UFO data, such as
 >>it is, else I wouldn't be here. At the same time, to the extent
 >>that I have a public presence, I am not about to make or endorse
 >>statements ("alien bodies were recovered at Roswell... the
 >>Secretary General of the UN has been abducted") that I cannot in
 >>good conscience support with cold, hard scientific evidence.

 >Nor am I.

 >>Pawn to K4?

 >P-K4, Dick

Hmm, let me think about that one. I'm white and you're black,
right?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:23:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:13:23 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


Kevin,

You wrote:

 >The confusion exists because Corso said that he was promoted to
 >full colonel in the reserve and the record shows that this
 >statement is untrue. If Corso had said that he was a Lt. Col.,
 >there would be no confusion.

I agree but I'm still confused and working on trying to settle
this one way or the other. His son stated that he thought all
officers were bumped up a rank upon retirement. Is that correct?
If so why wasn't Col. Corso? I'm not familiar with ranking
traditions but if I were you I wouldn't discount Corso's story
because of this confusion.

 >But the record shows that Corso was not who he said he was. He
 >was not a member of the NSC as he said he was. He was not a
 >member of MJ-12, as he said he was. Yeah, I know what you'll say
 >here. He never made that claim. But he said in one version of
 >the proposal for his book that he was a member of MJ-12... a
 >claim that was dropped from the book.

He was a very important intelligence staff member from 1953 to
1956 and Ike's military adviser to the both the OCB and the NSC.
He was the OCB's delegate to the CIA group planning the
overthrow of Guatemala's Jacob Arbenz in 1954.

This group read like a who's who in the spook world and the
contacts he made there play important roles in later cold war
espionage. It was there that he connected with Frank Hand who is
mentioned in passing in the FBI files as Corso's main CIA
contact person, although he knew all the major players.

 >And, there is a real question about his military career. Why was
 >he a major in 1945 and retired as a Lt. Col. in what, 1962 or
 >1963. Why wasn't he promoted faster? Why didn't he make full
 >colonel. That suggests a problem with his performance of his
 >duties and suggests that the FBI take on him is correct.

No, not at all. Corso bucked the system and was not a "go along,
get along" type of person. He was a staunch foe of communism and
of the CIA and  it's liberal tendencies. He testified before
congress about the "military muzzling" of General Walker after
Walker was kicked out of Germany in 1961. This did not endear
him to his superiors and both he and General Trudeau were asked
to resign in 1962.

 >Santilli had nothing to do with the tent footage.
 >Of course he did. He was the one who provided it to a number of
 >different TV producers. He was the one who suggested it was of
 >the preliminary autopsy in a barn on the crash site and then,
 >when Philip Mantle proved it to be a hoax, dropped it like a hot
 >potato.

The story is clear that Ray had some damaged footage and asked
the hoaxers if they could get something from it. They sent him
the hoaxed footage instead. He had no inkling that this was
hoaxed and certainly no one told him it was hoaxed. The
cameraman didn't remember it so Ray began to have doubts. Then
Philip informed him and that was the end to it. Of course once
Ray knew it was faked, he dropped it. What would you have
expected him to do?

 >>>He changed the cameraman's statement
 >>>after it was pointed out that it was not an American "voice,"

 >>I'm not aware of this. Could you provide proof. I've heard these
 >>rumors before but haven't seen any evidence. I would appreciate
 >>knowing more about this. You can write me off line.

 >Don Ecker and Bob Shell had this discussion a couple of years
 >ago. Shell claimed that the transcript of the cameraman's
 >statement was an accurate transcript. When Ecker, among others,
 >pointed to statements that were clearly British (joined the
 >"Forces" as the British would say as opposed to joined the
 >"Army" or "military" as an American would say, as a single
 >example), Santilli claimed that the problem was the typist, who
 >apparently translated the American expressions into British.
 >Please note here that the transcript came from Santilli
 >originally, and a copy was sent to Bob Shell.

Where did he change the cameraman's statement? He just explained
why there were mistakes. Do you think Ray made this up? Have you
ever read much of what Ray has written? Ray wouldn't even have
the slightest idea of how to go about making up a story on
Roswell. If he did why, didn't he do a better job and why was
the cameraman's version of events of so far off the mark from
the other Roswell testimony and research. If they were planning
a hoax and they wanted folks to believe it, why didn't the alien
have four fingers, at least. This is what I mean by drawing a
map. How do all these incongruous facts make any sense. How do
you put all this together. You must have some idea since you
hold such strong opinions. Ray did have rolls of 16mm film. It
was converted to video.

If you would get the CDs and load them on your computer, and
take a good look at the footage, I think you'll change your
mind. You'll see that there is absolutely no way that this
footage could be faked. I'll send you the CDs and Dave V will
help you to load them and if you spend a few hours viewing them,
you'll then realize that this footage is not hoaxed. You won't
be able to explain how it was made and you'll soon appreciate
the cameraman's skills. I can't imagine why you and Stan all the
others on the list are so afraid of what you might find. It
won't cost you a penny, only a few hours time, far less that
answering my posts to updates.

 >had those crazy security classifications that he showed until
 >>those with the knowledge said such classifications never
 >>existed... and so on. Not one lie but multiple lies.

 >>The above statement is not correct. The security classifications
 >>were part of the hoaxed tent footage and Ray may have alluded to
 >>them but he didn't understand their importance. I believe the
 >>classification information was taken from the box or film label
 >>that was with the film Ray sent to the "tent" hoaxers. He had
 >>asked the hoaxers to see what they could get from some of the
 >>film that was severely damaged. The classifications were not
 >necessarily bogus and I've written to both you and Stan about
 >>this fact. Do you remember? It had to do with "restricted" as a
 >>classification.

 >So part of the package put together by Santilli, which
 >originally included the tent footage is a hoax, but the rest of
 >it is real.

You wrote "those crazy security classifications that he showed
until those with the knowledge said such classifications never
existed..." My point was that these classifications are not
crazy and that they do/did exist and that I can prove it. When
Ray included the tent footage, he didn't know it was a hoax.
Yes, yes yes the tent footage is a hoax but that is the only
part of the AA that is and there is absolutely no comparison
between the tent footage and the remaining parts of the AA.
Remember the tent footage is not to be confused with the debris
footage which is also shot in a tent.

 >>I certainly don't agree with that. You've not answered the M.
 >>Dennis article, nor the striking resemblance between the Ft
 >>Worth Roswell photos and the debris in the AA.

 >Okay, but you won't like the answer. The Fort Worth pictures
 >show the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target and not
 >pieces of a flying saucer. Any images seen in this wreckage are
 >so many faces in the clouds.

The images are not 'faces in a cloud" and we can certainly prove
that if anyone would take a look at what Neil has produced. But
the "striking resemblance' I'm talking about is the debris
itself. Some of the components we've seen in the Ft Worth photos
are almost exactly the same debris as in the AA. The team has
looked at the Ft. Worth photos very closely and there is no
evidence that the material on the floor in Gen. Ramey's office
resembles a weather balloon.

 >And, I find it difficult to believe that when looking at alien
 >symbols, we would find an English word in them. One of the
 >I-beams in the footage has the word video on it. What are the
 >chances that a video tape of alien debris would contain the word
 >video on it?

This is a complete fabrication. There isn't any "video" at all.
Where is your proof for this statement. Yes this has been said
before but when you look closely, there is no such word.

 >>You have not ordered the AA CDs to take a look, for yourself,
 >>at our evidence. You haven't rebutted the Corso VSA. You have
 >>investigated Col. Corso's background, but only superficially.

 >Don't have to rebut the VSA because we have caught Corso
 >in other lies and misrepresentations.

I would say that in light of the VSA that you might reconsider
that maybe the so-called "misrepresentations" may have other
explanations.

 >I think I joined this thread (against my better judgement) to
 >support a statement made by Greg Sandow that I found
 >interesting.

But as it turns out, Greg's statement wasn't correct. Corso did
play a role in the Cuban Missile crisis and Paul Scott verified
this. If we could take the so-called "misrepresentations" one at
a time we might be better off. I concede that I'm at a loss over
the rank issue but I haven't seen much else that could qualify
Corso as a liar. There are mistakes, though, and I readily admit
to that.

 >His version of the events in
 >Roswell do not match the testimony of others and his tale of
 >seeing the body at Ft. Riley makes no sense in the real world of
 >security and secrecy.

No, it doesn't, but don't you think, if he were a liar, it
would. Yes this is improbable but you have no evidence that it
didn't happen.

 >Foolish or not, if Corso is proven to be telling the truth, then
 >I will leap on the bandwagon and apologize for all the mean
 >things I said. I will not, however, hold my breath.

  I'd keep the door open, just in case.

 >And believe him we would, had there been any evidence to back up
 >his claims. He failed to produce any of it and the little
 >documentation we found did not support what he said.

Yes this is the main problem.

 >>He was wrong. But we do have scientific proof that he wasn't
 >>being deceptive, Mike's VSA. VSA is a scientific tool and all
 >>investigators should have one in their tool kit.

 >If the VSA is 100% accurate, then it is being used by courts to
 >determine the truthfulness of witnesses and defendants in trial.
 >If not, why not? And, even if completely accurate, it only
 >proves that the person telling the story believes it to be true,
 >not that it is true. The investigation must be made up of more
 >than a single test.

Polygraphs are extremely reliable, accurate and consistent but
still are not allowed except when both prosecution and defense
agree. The VSA and the polygraph are used by many major
investigative agencies including the FBI and most local police
departments. If they use these tools to limit mistakes, then we
should ,too.

 >>Should we reject all that Corso says simply because you and
 >>others have called him a liar? He has passed a VSA on these
 >>questions. Explain that before you start supposing this and
 >>that. You all need to take another look at the Corso
 >>information.

 >No, I am suggesting that we reject Corso because many of the
 >things he said were not proven in the documentation. The only
 >conclusion to be drawn here is that Corso was not telling the
 >truth.

There are many documents and histories that prove that Corso was
a major player but I agree that there is little to prove that he
seeded alien technology to the business community. What we
should be investigating is the chain of evidence that the
various companies have for the technologies they say they
invented.

Corso said many things and most of them have not been discussed
or analyzed because of folks like you who insist that we
shouldn't take a closer look because it's all BS. You and Stan
and Greg and Richard, and Jerry and many others have effectively
shut down discussion because you're all so damn sure of
yourselves. Who's going to argue with you powerhouses, except
someone outside the UFO community like myself?

 >>I do have evidence, the VSA. He's telling the truth.
 >>You should listen.

 >A single bit of evidence that is open to interpretation. It does
 >not negate all the other evidence aligned against Corso.

There isn't much other evidence "aligned against Corso". You
keep recycling the same evidence. He lied about his rank and he
was a commander, not the commander.

Below is his service record:

1. LTC Corso was a commissioned in the Artillery and the
Artillery was his control branch during his career.

2. He was a reserve officer.

3. He serve 21 years in the Army.
    23 Feb 42-1 Mar 63

4. He has credit for 4 overseas tours.
    European theater 13 Apr 43- 22 Mar 46
    Mediterreanian theater 24 May 46-22 Mar 47
    Far East Command 1 Sep 50-2 Jun 53
    US Army, Europe 19 Oct 57-13 Spe 60

5. He was granted a General Staff Identifier on 1 Jun 62

6. He was promoted to LTC in AUS on 30 July 53 and in USAR
21 May 1957.

7. He had a long list of Military Occupational Specialities
most involved with Intelligence and Air Defense Artillery.

8. He had a command as a Battalion Commander of Air Defense
Battalion in Europe.

9. Civilian Education includes 2 years of college. He had
two Intel Courses and three Artillery Courses.

10. He was awarded the Legion of Merit and other commendations.
He has a number of campaign ribbons for service during WW II and
the Korean War.

11. He has not credit for campaigns in Korea.

12. He was detailed away from his career main branch five
times for a significant part of his career.

13. He was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas from 21 April 1947-
12 May 1950.

14. He was assigned to GHQ, Far East Command on 11 Sep 50 to
1 Jan 53, as Intel Staff Off, Plans & Estimate Branch, Theater
Intel Div, G-2

15. From 1 Jan 53 to 2 Jun 53 he was assigned as Chief Special
Project Branch, G-2 Section of the HQ, AFFE, 8000th AU (I do not
know what these designations mean.)

16. From 15 Jul 53 to 20 Oct 56 he served in various Intel
positions in Washington, DC included a short temporary duty
to the Psycological Strategy Board at the State Department.

17. He had various other assignments until 1961. The most
important to his career was as Battalion Commander from
1957 to 1958.

18. On June 20th, 1961 he was assigned to the Foreign Technology
Division (FTD) as a Staff office. He stayed at that assignment
until 18 July 1962 when he was assign as Staff Officer in the
Plans Div, OCRD, Washington, DC.

19. During his FTD assignment, he was chief from 18 April - 18
Jul 1962. Of this 90 day assignment which qualified him for a
official rating report as chief, he was absent for 15 days of
those days.

 >>I wouldn't believe anything that Pflock says.

 >So you'll just reject, out of hand, all of this evidence, even
 >when Pflock can supply copies of the letters showing the chain
 >of evidence? Pflock has the documentation, but more to the
 >point, Thurmond's office demanded that new copies of the book,
 >and the paperback be issued without the introduction. Sounds to
 >me like the evidence supports Pflock's version and not the spin
 >put on it by others.

Why would Birnes lie? Why would Simon&Schuster lie about this.
Besides Corso did work for Strom and anyone who knows anything
about him, knows that he does not suffer fools. He would never
have written what he did about Col. Corso if he didn't believe
it was true. I'll take a close look at Pflock's book but I'm
certainly skeptical of his claims. I think Strom's staff decided
to shield and distance him from the glare of this controversy.

 >>So how many digits did the Roswell alien have? What's you're
 >>latest thinking on this?

 >Certainly not six.

Well then, how many?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                Menzel's Spectre Returns to Haunt 'Believers'

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 01:43:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:26:51 -0400
Subject: Menzel's Spectre Returns to Haunt 'Believers'


This is a... 'light blue touch paper and retire'... contribution
to UFO UpDates.

That's acknowledged and _should be understood as such_.

However, if you want to be aware of some landmark, historical
and exceedingly rare 'UFO' related material, the following has
just been published on the 'UFO Skeptics' list:


In 1967, the highly regarded UK TV documentary series 'World in
Action', dedicated an entire program [25 minutes] to the
'serious' subject of UFOs.

The investigations were all undertaken in America and the
program includes some notable interviews. A few years ago,
Graham Birdsall of UFO Magazine (UK) was given a copy of this
archive footage on video and kindly duplicated it for me.

I've relocated my copy and having viewed this for the first time
since 3 or 4 years ago, it definitely justifies highlighting the
contents.

There are exceptionally interesting, historical interviews with
Prof. James McDonald, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Dr. Edward Condon and
Dr. Donald Menzel. The latter is particularly notable.

In addition to NICAP being featured, also filmed are the entire
'Condon Committee' as they investigate evidence for the
University of Colorado's 'Scientific Study of Unidentified
Flying Objects'.

A reminder that the 'National Capital Area Skeptics' have an
outstanding online presentation of the resulting report at:

http://www.ncas.org/condon/


I hope to capture some of the material as an audio file and make
it available - especially Menzel's interview.

The only surprise, at least to me, is McDonald talking about the
patently hoaxed Heflin 'flying saucer' or 'straw hat'
photographs and citing them as significant scientific evidence
which, "really seem to stand very close scrutiny".

There's an interview with Heflin in his truck, explaining how
the photographs were allegedly taken.

Menzel remarks they are, "an excellent example of a hoax".


I'm delighted to reveal and appropriately on 'UFO Skeptics',
Menzel's astute summary on the state of 'ufology'. Although the
first time in 34 years this has been published, it's so poignant
his comments could have been made today:


"I don't think you'll ever clear the air to the satisfaction at
least of the UFO buffs.

They want to believe, they're happy believing, let them go on
believing.

I think it's a great waste of time and money to spend much more
time investigating it... to go on for year after year trying to
prove whether or not these things come from outer space or not.

It's clear that they don't and I'm quite sure that will be the
result of any investigation."


Those who would criticise Menzel's conclusions should reflect on
the fact they've had an astounding 34 years to prove him wrong
and why that's no more likely today, than it was back in 1967.
[END]


Expected implosions and objections anticipated, it does
factually remain the prerogative of those who contest Menzel's
spectre to dispel it and evidence the scientific recognition of
'ufology' during the past 34 years.

As Led Zeppelin noted... 'Been a long time...'.


James Easton

E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 27

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 22:07:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:31:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:29:36 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >><snip>

 >>>I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >>>that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >>>says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >>>been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >>>was in such an outfit.

 >>>Jan Aldrich

 >>Hi Jan,

 >>As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
 >>or ever existed.

 ><snip>

 >>Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
 >>program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
 >>doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
 >>program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
 >>from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
 >>program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
 >>in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

 >This makes no sense at all. Blue Book was not a TS Codeword
 >program. MJ-12 was purportedly set up by Truman to control _all_
 >UFO information, not just its own supposedly limited
 >jurisdiction (by your theory).

Hi Brad,

I merely point out the facts about TS/Codeword programs and how
they operate. What I said is correct.

 >>For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
 >>clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
 >>dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
 >>clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
 >>systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
 >>the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
 >>medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
 >>people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
 >>people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

 >This again makes no sense. The MJ-12 Committee members were the
 >top purported _policymakers_ who had to have access to _all_
 >information in order to set UFO policy even if lower level
 >personnel were all compartmented. Menzel was an alleged member
 >of the MJ-12 Committee, not some lower level scientist
 >consultant as you seem to be treating him here.

Incorrect. Doesn't matter how many so called top policy makers
there are. They would only have access to what they were
directly involved with as a general rule. For example _if_ MJ-12
existed you might only have had say the President and one or two
people that _saw_ and _knew_ the whole picture.

For example. In Ben Rich or Clearance Kellys book they describe
the chain of command on the Stealth fighter project. They
described how the project was run in the skunk works (not even
the President of Lockheed was cleared to know), how they
reported to a one star AF general who then reported to the
SecDef, who then reported directly to the President. Kept out of
the loop was the VP, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the assortment of
AF ranking officers.

Harry Truman was not briefed on the Manhatten Project _until_ he
became President. In essence he didn't have a "need-to-know"
until he became President. Just because you are a so called top
policy maker doesn't instantly give you a "need-to-know."

In our country today the intelligence community budget is approx
30 billion dollars. Generally speaking 535 people vote to
approve or disapprove budget. Out of that 535 people only a
handful of people actually _know_ and _see_ what the
intelligence community is spending money on. Awhile back one of
the members of the Senate Intel committee (who does oversight on
the Intel community) said that their was only 3 or 4 people on
the entire committee who actually know and see everything while
others are cleared at a lessor level of access.

 >>Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
 >>denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
 >>called basic information.

 >No way, I don't buy it. Menzel did not just have purported
 >"MJ-12 clearance" but was himself allegedly a member of the
 >elite MJ-12 Committee.

Lets put it this way. "To your and myself's knowledge Donald
Menzel did not have a MJ-12 clearance." "We have yet to see any
evidence that he did..." That doesn't translate out to he did
not have. It translates out to we don't know.

Recall Stan's ground breaking work and discovery that Menzel
had to level clearances through the NSA. Note: The top level
clearances through NSA did not entitle him to access say to
DOD, USAF, or AEC information. It only entitles him to access
certain NSA information on a need-to-know basis only. His
NSA clearances would not have entitled him to access any
and all information classified under those clearences.

 >>As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >>released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >>classified side to it.

 >This is untrue. We have plenty of information directly from BB
 >personnel who have been interviewed, BB's superiors whom I
 >interviewed (Gen. Garland, Col. Bower, et al.), Ruppelt's
 >papers, BB documents _not_ in the National Archives such as
 >those in Hynek's files, CIA, etc., NONE of which shows any
 >"highly classified" or TS Codeword type side to it.

The documents that would show a "codeword" side, _if_ it in fact
existed would be classified with such a codeword and not be
released with the publicly available BB documents.

If you go back into the NASA files on the Discovery Sat program
you will find absolutly no hint of any kind of "codeword" side.
When the govt declassified the "Corona" project records suddenly
you have all sorts of records that until that point had never
existed so to speak. Also people that had been previously
interview by experts and researchers were now telling
information that they had previously not told anybody because it
was a highly classified code word program.

 >>If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >>have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >>stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

 >That's not what the bogus Eisenhower Briefing Document says --
 >it says MJ-12 had "liason" (stupidly misspelled twice by the
 >hoaxer) with BB's head, _not_ a secretary or a lesser person
 >than the BB chief Ruppelt.

I have been to the Eisenhower library years ago and noticed
typing errors and misspellings in documents I was going through
as part of Cold War history research. Needless to say I don't
get to excited by the misspellings and errors.

As to the head of BB being the liason to the alleged MJ-12 a
couple of things are in order.

1) That someone at a AF project, whether the head of the project
or otherwise, liasoned with a TS/Codeword program is entirely
possible.

Just because you or I spoke to them or interviewed them does not
mean that they would tell us that information. They would likely
talk about the "publicly released side" so to speak.

2) _If_ Menzel had an MJ-12 clearance he would have had to
requested UFO information from Bluebook through his (MJ-12 if it
existed) channels. The question would have come up does he have
a need-to-know and for what purpose does he want the
information?

If you understand how classified programs work you could easily
understand how Menzel would not be entitled to BB information
even though he might have had an MJ-12 clearance.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                        Re: Serious Research - Sawers

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:14:26 +1200
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:44:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sawers


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:36:12 +1200
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:18:02 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sawers

 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:36:06 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:47:08 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research - Velez

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:04:35 -0000


 >>Hi Dick, Bob, All,

 >>'Opinion' ahead! Run for the hills!!! ;) Not all of this is
 >>being directed at you personally Bob. It's more of a general
 >>comment than 'Bob Young' specific. Although it does apply to  you
 >>in many respects.

 ><snip>

 >Dick Hall wrote:

 >>>Totally irrelevant. I can take you to the National Archives
 >>>where the Project Blue Book files are kept, or to the
 >>>CUFOS-NICAP files.

 >>>Bob responded:

 >>>Got any saucers there?

 >>UFOs represent a profound event in the history of mankind.
 >>There is enough 'hard' evidence for the existence of a 'real'
 >>phenomenon (whatever its origin) to convince even the hardest
 >>skeptic that there is a genuine mystery here. There are enough
 >>FOIA released -government documents- alone (aside from the
 >>aforementioned Bluebook and CUFOs files, etc.) to put to rest
 >>any doubts as to the existence of 'anomalous' craft(s) (genuine
 >>unknowns) operating in our collective air space.

 >>Only someone who has _unchangeably_ made up their mind about
 >the
 >>nature of UFOs could question its validity as a real phenom and
 >>continually demand "proof."

 >>The debate over the true 'nature' of these objects is one
 >thing,
 >>but those who are stuck on square one in terms of still
 >>questioning the 'existence' of UFOs should be left out of any
 >>ongoing discussions at this point. It is counter productive

 ><sadly snipped>

 >(Willian followed with...)

 >Excellent post John.

 >I've been thinking this way for the last ten years or so, up
 >till about 1988+ the majority of books coming out on the subject
 >of UFOs were rehashes of old sightings. We have to move on. Most
 >ppl, even the great unwashed believe there is something out
 >there/here even!

 >We're not going anywhere and this will continue if we keep
 >getting bogged down with trying to convince the unconvincable.

 >Maybe that's why they're here?

 >I can't see that it's a hobby for them, doesn't seem too
 >enjoyable to me. Scouring UFO lists to find things they can
 >disagree with?

 >All it seems to do is divert us from the real reason we're here
 >which John has so eloquently stated in the above.

 >Thanks again John,


Just to clear up a couple of things that may have been
mis-understood.

I, like John wasn't advocating excluding anyone from the List
either.

Refer to my post to see, I was agreeing with John. It was really
a query as to why we seem to keep rehashing the same old same
old, and why the "unconvincible" stick around.

I see the debunkers/skeptics are a necessary evil :-) (?) (They
keep us honest and on our toes), but I stand by my statement,
"Whats in it for them?" and what sort of pleasure do they get
when they feel they've scored a point! It 's perverse and even
masochistic <g>I have been on a list where debunkers were under
pressure to leave and I would _never_ advocate that, but we
still must have the right to ask the question..."why?"


William








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                     Re: Greer Press Conference - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 02:14:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:48:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer Press Conference - Gates


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:31:32 EDT
 >Subject: Greer Press Conference
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Good Afternoon All -

 >I have spent a good part of the day trying to figure out why I
 >am angry about Dr. Greer's news conference. It certainly isn't
 >because I wasn't invited because I have rejected three offers to
 >appear on national programs in the last year. One of them, on
 >The History Channel, was about the closing of Project Blue Book
 >and I couldn't see any reason to fly out to the east coast for a
 >segment of a program that would last, at best, eight minutes,
 >when they told me that they had Colonel Friend, who was once a
 >chief of Blue Book, and a couple of scientists, already booked.
 >I figured I'd spend three days doing all this and then end up on
 >the cutting room floor.

 >But I digress.

 >I believe the reason that I was angry was the inclusion of
 >people who were obviously making up their "insiders" knowledge.
 >I don't want to mention any names here (Sergeant Cliff Stone),
 >but one of them, who had started out as a rather knowledgeable
 >man, and who had some interesting insights, evolved into someone
 >who had been involved in every UFO sighting since before he was
 >born. True, he suggested that he had seen files, or films, or
 >whatever, but he had been there in some fashion.

Hi Kevin,

Didn't Stone also claim to have see the Alien Fraudtopsy PS (Pre
Santilli) as part of his Army dutys or whatever?

<snip>

 >This then is the source of my anger. The real point is if this
 >is the caliber of Greer's insiders, then they will be exposed
 >quickly. It's just as obvious that Greer and his team do not
 >bother to investigate the claims being made. When they are
 >exposed, we all look as if we have no powers of discrimination

They apparently don't. I got the impression that the drill was
to trot out a number of people, rather then check the storys for
accuracy. IF the whole thing happens to invoke congressional
interest and investigators start checking storys and come up
with shall we say "problems" the whole thing will be
discredited.

Naturally all the supporters and believers will claim the evil
conspiracy discredited our witnesses, blah blah, woof woof.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

              Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 02:36:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:27:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'
 >Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:05:41 +0100

 >There are a number of underlying issues concerning the recent
 >'Disclosure Project'.

 >The point which shouldn't be overlooked and the most significant
 >one, is that Dr Steven Greer _does_ represent mainstream
 >ufology. On behalf of it, he presented a substantial amount of
 >data and testimony which was claimed to justify the 'disclosure'
 >initiative.

The really important point here is that Greer represents
himself, CSETI and the Disclosure project all of which are
connected with him. It would not be correct to claim that he
represents main stream ufology, although I am sure the skeptics
would like to make the connection.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                     Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:14:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:29:40 -0400
Subject: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis


Someone recently asked what was available that shows JFK and top
level officials _knew_ that soviet equipment was being put into
Cuba. (in connection with Corso book) I mentioned that people
knew about this long before October 15, 1962.

If interested I suggest that you go to this web link:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/03-01.gif

Of additional interest see the classification of the document,
i.e. Top Secret & Sensitive.

There are many other documents around, especially just after the
infamous Bay of Pigs fiasco in which people were alleging that
soviet equipment and troops were being dumped into Cuba.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                       Re: Talk And Action - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:07:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:34:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Maccabee


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000


 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
 >>science would just come over here and take an honest look at
 >>what we've got, things would change. This totally ignores the
 >>fact that science _should_ be detecting this stuff on its own,
 >>coming to us, and asking, "wow, look what we got here! Got
 >>anything like that in your database?" Again, _if_ UFO events
 >>were as common and profligate as much of ufology insists they
 >>are.

I suspect that "science" is detecting these things on its own.
More properly , scientific experiments detect anomalies but the
scientists involved, not being aware of the "Wealth" of UFO
data, assume that there is something wrong with the instruments
or they think that "this is the only one" and "I don't dare tell
anyone." It may be like a situation with amateur astronomers
some 30 years ago. In Sky and Telescope no one was discussing
UFOs until someone wrote a letter to the Editor describing a
strange event in the sky. Subsequently others wrote to report
their own strange events." I recall checking up on a couple of
these by communication with the people involved. Learned of a
daylight sighting of "Jupiter" that resulted in a photograph of
"Jupiter". According to the witness, moments after the
photograph "Jupiter" split into two parts and these parts
whizzed away from one another into the distance. I doubt that
any of the other Sky and Telescope readers found out the details
about this sighting that I found out.. I also assume that none
of them, including the witness, was aware of "splitting UFOs" in
the literature.

Another case: the Condon report itself discusses an instrumented
sighting by a device intended to measure the brightness of the
twilight or night sky, as I recall. (Maybe they were looking for
comets?) (It was a scanning photometer on top of a Mt. in
Hawaii.) This device recorded data every night. Several of the
Condon people decided as a test, to study a day or so's worth of
these data to see if something unusual turned up. As it turned
out, they found an unidentifiable light they terms Unidentified
Bright Object. UBO. To find this UBO they had to go to the
trouble of analyzing every recorded light track and to identify
all of the star trails, etc. This was a time consuming project
which would not have been done ordinarily. In other words, this
UBO would have been ignored if it hadn't been for the fact that
the scientists involved were alert to the possibility and were
actually looking for anything unusual.

Then there are the hundreds(?) of uncorrelated targets ignored
by the radar fence around the USA...programmed to search for
ballistic targets and ignore powered objects. The radar guys
don't report their "sightings" to ufologists for analysis. They
feel perfectly competent to reject "UFO sightings" on their own.

And what happened when an imaging telescope in Hawaii in 1995
got video of a strange set of lights moving through the night
sky? Did they immediately run to the ufologists and say "what is
this?" or "Wow, look what we got?". No. The video was "leaked"
to Nightline which took 6 months to decide to use it on the
night that the INDEPENDENCE DAY move was to open. One month
before that they had contacted me about it... after having the
video for about 5 months...and they wanted an "on camera"
instantaneous analysis (would not let me see it before they
videotaped me for the show). This was all described in a paper I
wrote for the MUFON Journal (Nightline UFO) in late 1996.

Point is, the scientists who got the video originally didn't
know "how to:" investigate a "UFO" sighting, so they did their
own thing, decided "airplane" was a useful explanation, and shut
up about it. At least most of them did... someone obviously
didn't buy the airplane explanation. (He/she should have.)

Bottom line: "Science" may be detecting UFOs on its own, but
until "ufology" looks scientific, the scientists will keep their
own counsel and not approach the ufological community with any
possible detections.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                CCCRN News: 05-27-01 - First 'Circular Forum'

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:41:37 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:41:44 -0400
Subject: CCCRN News: 05-27-01 - First 'Circular Forum'


CCCRN NEWS
The E-News Service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

May 27, 2001

_____________________________



For those in or near the Vancouver area:

FIRST 'CIRCULAR FORUM' STUDY GROUP

Join CCCRN for brunch and the first study group of 2001, a
chance for informal, in-depth discussion of the latest crop
circle related news and reports from Canada, Europe and around
the world, in a relaxed, eclectic atmosphere with the best
coffee, tea, sandwiches, soups, desserts and electronica. Topic:
'First Circles of 2001'. To be held the first Wednesday of each
month at SDC through the summer and fall.

Starry Dynamo Cafe
4342 Main Street, Vancouver, BC
Wednesday, June 6, 2001
11:00 am - 12:30 pm
Free admission

Hosted by Starry Dynamo Cafe

For further information:
Tel: 604.875.9975
E-Mail: starrydynamocafe@yahoo.com

Or contact CCCRN


____________________________


The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is a non-profit
organization which investigates the crop circle phenomenon and
possibly related phenomena in Canada, creating a liason between
researchers, farmers, the public, the media and scientists in
trying to solve this ongoing enigma


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH NETWORK

Main Office:
Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

Provincial Branches:
http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.html


� Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

             International UFO Research Day Release & Invitation

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:59:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:43:23 -0400
Subject: International UFO Research Day Release & Invitation


PRESS RELEASE and INVITATION

On June 24, 2001, International UFO Research Day will be held
with the support of dozens of organizations from different
countries.

The purpose of this event is to offer proper recognition to the
efforts made by researchers in the evolution of Ufology as a
serious and disciplined field of study. Many of these
researchers, who largely remain anonymous, have devoted a
considerable part of their lives and resources in sacrifice to
the search for the truth about extraterrestrial life in our
universe. Some of them have placed their reputations, their
lives and their livelihoods in jeopardy. This is the day on
which we choose to honor them.

June 24th was chosen as the date for this celebration due to the
U.S. civilian aviatori Kenneth Arnold's life-changing experience
on that day in 1947--an event which led him to describe the
formation of objects he saw as "flying saucers", a term which
acquired currency all over the world.

To this end, on the evening of June 23rd, beginning at 10:00
p.m. and running to 2:00 a.m. in the morning of June 24th, we
shall celebrate a major UFO Alert jointly with Argentina's
Project Condor. Thousands of people all over the planet will
raise their eyes skyward in a common search for any unusual
aerial phenomena as a sign of their support for this event.

All interested parties are invited to join this major event.

For more information, please
visit:http://www.ovni.net/noticias/ufo_day.html

The following lists the participating organizations to date:

Proyecto Condor - Argentina
Centro Estudios UFO - Argentina
Grupo Caf - Mxico
Ovnivision - Chile
Centro de Investigaciones Planetarias (CEINPLA) - Venezuela
Ovni.net - Puerto Rico
Puerto Rican Research Group (PRRG) - Puerto Rico
Miami Ufo Center - USA
Calama UFO Center - Chile
SIB Betelgeuse - Spain
Centro de Estudios e Investigaciones Alieligenas (CEIA) - Brazil
IPRI - Peru
JJ Benitez - Spain
FUNDACION COSMOS S.A.- Mexico
Institute for Hispanic Ufology - USA
IMPRIMATUR - USA
Misterio-AR - Argentina
Al Filo de la Realidad  - Argentina
Alcione - Mexico
CEIA - Brazil
Presenzaliena - Italy
Extratrerrestresonline - Canary Islands
Operacin Contacto - Mexico
OJIO - Mexico
MUFON Nuevo Len - Mexico
TOC - Chile
Los Ovnis Proyecto de Investigacin - Equador
El Dragn Invisible - Argentina
Contacto OVNI - Colombia
Diario Estrella del Loa - Chile
CEMCA - Puerto Rico
Enigma 13 -1230 AM - Mexico
CIELO - Argentina
ODEFO - Chile
Grupo Austral - Chile
ESIO - Chile
EBE-ET - Brazil
OVNIS Inc. - Puerto Rico
GIFAE - Mexico
GRUPO FENIX - Spain
FOC - Chile
AIFOC - Chile
EYE - Spain
GIFOR - Chile
SPOC - Brazil
NASAIC - Puerto Rico
VI Alerta Ovni de Malaga - Spain
Canal Ovni de Terra - Chile
CUA - Puerto Rico
Proyecto Orion - Venezuela
and others ...
Don't forget:
JUNE 24 - UFO RESEARCH DAY
Join this worldwide event !
For more information please visit:
(espaol) www.ovni.net/noticias/dia_ovni.html
(English) www.ovni.net/noticias/ufo_day.html


Dr. Virgilio Snchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/ufomiami/index.html
Chupacabras
http://ufomiami.homestead.com/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                                UFO Courses?

From: Thiago Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 19:20:17 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:45:01 -0400
Subject: UFO Courses?


Hello,


I am writing a article about UFO courses around the world (in
Universities or open-courses).

If you can help me, please send me a private e-mail.


Regards,

Thiago Luiz Ticchetti


Vice-Presidente da Entidade Brasileira de Estudos
Extraterrestres(Braslia/Brasil) (EBE-ET VICE PRESIDENT)

www.ebe-et.com.br ICQ 35119615











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs? -

From: Joe McGonagle <joe@mcgonaglenet.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:03:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:47:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs? -


I don't know why, but I haven't seen any response on this List
to my original post about this on 16 May 2001, perhaps it is to
do with the service problems. My original post is at:

http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m16-005.shtml


I did receive a reply from Jenny Randles via another List, and
thought that some of you may like to read it:

_______________________________

"Hi,

Sadly - I think this isnt new. It appears to be a story that has
been known about since the l970s.

The memo is real enough. I have a copy in my FBI file. Its been
discussed in several books and its origin is well understood.

Unfortunately, the story behind the memo is a notorious hoax -
basically a tall tale told by a con man 'scientist' in about
l950 . The Air Force man simply attended one of the scam selling
lectures and reported what they heard - pissibly as a 'UFO spy'
for the FBI. Tis all.

Around that time McCarthyism was strong and the new UFO movement
was considered a potential means of undermining the government
by Commie infiltrators in the eyes of people running the secret
service. So it is more than likely that many UFO lectures were
attended incognito in this fashion.

The full story of this dubious saga is in my chapter 'Tall Tales
and Photographs' in my book 'UFO Retrievals' - published by
Cassell about 6 years ag. This is a chronological account of
known UFO crash cases (of varying degrees of credibility).

If anyone is interested or cannot find this in their library (I
doubt many bookshops will still have it) then I still have a few
copies on offer at bargain prices. It was one of the books I
offered in a list a few weeks back.Just ask.

But thats basically the story behind this memo and pretty much
all you need to know.


Best wishes,

Jenny Randles"
_______________________________


Cheers,


Joe








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

               Eras News: 05-28-01 - New 'Face on Mars' Images

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 21:26:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:27 -0400
Subject: Eras News: 05-28-01 - New 'Face on Mars' Images


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

May 28, 2001

____________________________



NEW 'FACE ON MARS' IMAGES


A new image of the controversial 'Face on Mars' was released by
NASA on May 24, the highest-resolution image so far available,
and the first to show the Face in its entirety. As may have been
predictable, the new image has still not settled the long-argued
question of whether the object is natural or artifical in
origin; while a preliminary look may seem to indicate a natural
mesa, there are still certain features that may indicate
artificiality; albeit the formation may be hundreds of thousands
if not millions of years old as per the general current
consensus in the community of researchers studying this and many
other anomalous features on Mars. The right side of the Face is
seen finally out of the shadows that were in previous images,
revealing a more chaotic looking appearance than that of the
western half. As has been speculated by some, there is what may
be termed a general 'feline' appearance to this portion of the
Face; whether this is by design (ie. shades of the Sphinx in
Egypt, the humanoid/feline duality) or simply an impression
given in this otherwise more heavily eroded half of the 'mesa'
is unknown. This idea of course is much more speculative. The
new images are apparently in response to the recent FACETS
letter, although NASA does not specifically state this in the
release itself, although it did in the recent correspondence
with FACETS - see previous report, NASA Responds to FACETS
Request Regarding Cydonia:

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject/facets.html

A 3-D stereographic anaglyph of the image has also been posted
on the MSSS web site.

Also, as mentioned in the MSNBC article linked below, Jim
Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, has
stated that another flyover of Cydonia is scheduled for next
month, and that more images of other objects of interest (as per
the NASA letter to FACETS) are possible. It should be kept in
mind that even if the Face itself did utimately turn out to be
completely natural, there are many other objects which have been
identified over the years by various researchers, all over the
planet, which in some cases are even more visually compelling as
possible artifacts. The overall question of possible ruins on
Mars is far from resolved.

Links to related news stories and reports regarding the new Face
images are posted below:


Mars Global Surveyor MOC2-283 Release

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/extended_may2001/face/index.html


NASA Revisits the 'Face on Mars'

http://www.msnbc.com/news/577946.asp?cp1=1


NASA: No Face - Honest

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1351000/1351319.stm


Unmasking the Face on Mars

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast24may_1.htm


The Face on Mars: Unmasked by New Images

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_face_010525-1.html


Stunning New Images of the Face on Mars

http://www.marsnews.com/


Face it - It is a Face

http://www.enterprisemission.com/about.htm


The Hominid-Lion Connection

http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/Hominid-Lion.JPG


A Decade-Old Prediction Confirmed

http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/decade.jpg


The Split-Faced Glyphs of the Maya

http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/maya1.jpg


2001 Mars Face Ends Speculation, Invites Inquiry

http://www.electricwarrior.com/mol/


Scientific Method Employed By NASA proves that Skeptic Martin
Gardner Has No Eyes, Mouth or Nose!

http://www.webpan.com/dsinclair/face.html


____________________________


The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies research project
which chronicles and examines the leading-edge news, events,
ideas and discoveries that will shape the future of humanity as
we enter the 21st Century and a new Era


THE ERAS PROJECT

Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/erasproject


� The Eras Project, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:26:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:53:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700

 >But as it turns out, Greg's statement wasn't correct. Corso did
 >play a role in the Cuban Missile crisis and Paul Scott verified
 >this.

I've stayed out of this for a while, but Ed's now repeated this
claim so many times I'm going to speak up.

I never said Corso played _no_ role in the missile crisis. I
never said he didn't leak information to the press, or that
there wasn't a newspaper article based on his leaks.

I said he didn't have the crucial effect that he said he did --
his leak to the press didn't force the Kennedy administration to
take action. This is clear from two recent histories I've read,
one a collection of transcripts of White House discussions
during the crisis, the other a detailed history of the NSA,
which recounts the NSA's role in the crisis.

Both sources show that JFK didn't need any prompting from the
press. He responded promptly to information developed by the
NSA, by the CIA, and from air surveillance.

The mere fact that there was a newspaper article doesn't prove
that the article was influential. I challenge Ed to find any
reputable history of the Cuban Missile Crisis that states
Kennedy was forced or even influenced to take action because of
something in a newspaper.

If he can't, he's basically making up history, arbitrarily
deciding how it must have been, to make Corso look good. The
reason I got into this in the first place was to explain how
Corso could, no matter how good his intelligence connections,
been the pain in the butt the FBI files say he was. In his book,
Corso inflates his role in something utterly uncontroversial,
the history of the Cuban missile crisis. He rewrites its
history, to make himself look important. If he similarly
inflated things when he dealt with the FBI, it's natural that
they'd get sick of him.

Once more -- I challenge Ed to produce evidence from a reputable
historian that Corso's newspaper article forced or even
influenced JFK to take action.


Greg Sandow









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                          New At Magonia - 05-28-01

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 17:30:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:57:48 -0400
Subject: New At Magonia - 05-28-01


Hi all,

Some new, aeons-overdue material is now up at Magnoia online:


* The Paranormal & the UK Media by Christopher French
One sceptic's experiences of life on the small screen

*Clarion Scrawl: Martin Kottmeyer decipher's ET languages

* Kevin McClure on Bruni's You Can't Tell the People

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



Mark Pilkington


m.pilkington@virgin.net

----------------------------------------------------------------
"The blood is the life, but electricity is the life of the
  blood."

                                     Dr Carter Moffat, 1892
----------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.forteantimes.com    : Fortean Times
online http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk : Magonia online












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                 Re: International UFO Research Day - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:47:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:59:05 -0400
Subject: Re: International UFO Research Day - Young


 >From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: International UFO Research Day
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 09:22:07 -0400

 >On June 24 we celebrate The International UFO Research Day. As
 >part of the program we will scan the sky for UFOs.

Hello:

Be carefull, because The planet Mars, near opposition and
closest approach on June 21, is nearest to the Earth and
brightest it's been since 1988.  It will be a gleaming orange
object, about -2.3 magnitude, visible suspiciously low
throughout the night in the Northern hemisphere, but high
overhead in C. and S. America.

See Sky & Telescope magazine's webpage for details:

http://www.skypub.com/sights/moonplanets/0105marsreturn.shtml

The precise azimuth and elevation of Mars for any location may
be deterined by using the following website:

http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eph


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

              Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:49:17 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:02:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished' -


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 02:36:22 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Greer - A Champion Of 'Ufology Vanquished'
 >>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:05:41 +0100

 >>There are a number of underlying issues concerning the recent
 >>'Disclosure Project'.

 >>The point which shouldn't be overlooked and the most significant
 >>one, is that Dr Steven Greer _does_ represent mainstream
 >>ufology. On behalf of it, he presented a substantial amount of
 >>data and testimony which was claimed to justify the 'disclosure'
 >>initiative.

 >The really important point here is that Greer represents
 >himself, CSETI and the Disclosure project all of which are
 >connected with him. It would not be correct to claim that he
 >represents main stream ufology, although I am sure the skeptics
 >would like to make the connection.


Hi Robert,

If I may butt in here.

I would suggest to James that Greer represents his [James's]
interests more than he does mine or most on this List. Lumping
interests together serves only your purpose and not ours. If you
actually read anything by some one else rather than steeping
yourself in your own, ill-reasoned theories, you would have
noted the displeasure by most on this List over Greer's actions
over the last few years.

But that doesn't fit into your agenda does it James? Like your
theories, you need only one tiny detail out of dozens that
agrees with your supposition to the exclusion of all others for
it to be proof.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 28

                        Re: Talk And Action - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:05:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Randle


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

Dennis, Jerry, List -

If I might throw in my two cents here...

<snip>

 >>What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
 >>its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
 >>or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
 >>advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
 >>for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

 >And no one will ever match you for your reading of the AF
 >report... What is cynical about not calling people liars, which
 >would have only invited lawsuits? Did you think the AF was
 >stoopid, too?

 >But, wait a minute, you say ufology has debunked these accounts
 >of bodies (after being the first to promote them). So, what is
 >it, exactly, that the Air Force is guilty of in _this_ report -
 >not admitting that they actually have bodies?

The Air Force is guilty here of not actually investigating
anything. They were attempting to refute the idea that something
of an ET nature had crashed at Roswell. Their first report is
filled with selective use of the data. For example, McAndrew
suggests, through Sheridan Cavitt, that there were no guards
around the crash sites and that no one was sworn to secrecy. Yet
the Air Force (McAndrew) knew that there were witnesses who did
say this and McAndrew knew who they were. Edwin Easley's
statement about being swore to secrecy is conspicuously absent
from that report, yet McAndrew knew it existed, and had he
asked, I would have sent him a copy of the tape. He had the
transcript.

When we move on to the second report, they still ignore what
Easley said, as well as other high ranking Air Force officers.
Instead, McAndrew focuses on testimony of Dennis and Ragsdale,
which I had told him was now considered to be bogus. They could
have it both ways because they knew that many of us would not
protest the "destruction" of these two testimonies because we
were the ones to reveal why they were now unacceptable.

The Air Force invented an answer that is ridiculous on the
surface. As Phil Klass suggested, they would have been better
off ignoring what a bunch of UFO nuts had to say because their
investigation suggested some validity to reports.

<snip>

 >There you go again: AF & UFOs equal dishonesty and cynicism and
 >nothing but. You probably think they rammed the Chinese pilot,
 >too.

I believe it was the Navy and the Chinese involved here, but I
understand the point.

 >Simple question: do you think they currently have in their possession
 >alien bodies from Roswell, given that ufologists have debunked so many
 >alleged Roswell "witnesses" who claim that they do?

I'll answer this for myself and let Jerry answer it later. Yeah,
I do think the government is in possession of alien bodies and
alien technology, regardless of the tales told by some of the
Roswell "witnesses."

 >If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
 >say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
 >Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
 >Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
 >Answer? They can't.

This is a question, or similar to a question, that I have asked
myself since the time of Condon. How could Condon, or the Air
Force, prove to me that UFOs are not extraterrestrial craft (as
if that was the pressing problem they faced)?

The answer is if the investigation was an honest one. It is
clear from the documented history that the Air Force Blue Book
and the Condon Committee had no real interest in answering the
question of visitation. In the case of the Air Force, they can
be forgiven because their real interest was in determining if
UFOs posed a threat to the security of the United States. Once
they had made that determination (that they posed no threat),
then the problem, for them, disappeared.

Condon had a multiple task. First, the committee determined,
once again that UFOs posed no threat to security. Again, that
satisfied the Air Force. Second, he was to determine if there
was anything of a scientific nature, or rather, if information
of scientific value, could be learned by a continued study of
UFOs. This is where he dropped the ball, if only because the
report suggests that something of scientific interest could be
learned. Not that UFOs are necessarily of extraterrestrial
origin, but that some of the reported phenomena might provide
clues about the world in which we live.

The problem for Condon and the Air Force was that they did not
honestly investigate the problem, or they were not honest in
their conclusions. They were caught with their hands in the
cookie jar.

With the fear that I might expand the discussion here, I think
an example is necessary. When Thomas Mantell was killed, the Air
Force was caught in a bad position. A pilot was dead chasing a
flying saucer and they had no idea why he had died. Yes, Mantell
had climbed to nearly 30,000 feet and blacked out from a lack of
oxygen. His aircraft then stalled, went into a dive and slammed
into the ground with no evidence that Mantell had ever regained
consciousness. The question was what was he chasing.

In 1948, the honest answer was "unidentified." Instead the Air
Force suggested a weather balloon, or Venus, or Venus and a
balloon, or Venus and two balloons. Those answers were not
correct and demonstrated the Air Force propensity for grabbing
any answer. I think, today, most of us agree that Mantell chased
a Skyhook balloon. In 1948, the Air Force didn't know that. They
should have been honest but they were not.

The point here, which might have gotten lost, is that I would
believe these reports if they weren't filled with half-truths
and outright distortions. It was the distortion of the Roswell
case that sank the Air Force. Even before their report came out,
they knew that some of the testimony they were going to use had
been discredited inside the UFO community. They knew why it had
been discredited because I told McAndrew about the on-going
investigations of Glen Dennis and what I had learned about Jim
Ragsdale. McAndrew even interviewed, on a number of occasions
Vic Golubic who lead the charge into research of Glen Dennis.

So, had they been honest in their research then the acceptance
of that research, by most of us, would have been guaranteed.
By the same token, when they began to distort the record, they
insured that we would not accept them, especially given their
past history of distortion and fabrication.

<snip>

 >Well, that's being objective, ain't it?  And who, other than
 >you, said anything about mindlessly praising government actions
 >or unthinkingly endorsing official conclusions? I didn't. I was
 >talking about the way the AF report chose to address a small
 >clump of witnesses which the UFO literature (until it had
 >serious second thoughts) chose to tout as reliable and worthy of
 >our consideration. It doesn't seem to strike you as a failing
 >that they showed up in our literature in the first place, let's
 >just  crown the ufologists for eventually outing them - you seem
 >to think this was the AF's job - and contemn the AF as cynical
 >and whatnot for not labeling them hoaxers or liars.

But isn't the real point that the Air Force latched onto these
unreliable witnesses and suggested their tales to be untrue only
after we, inside the UFO community had done that work for them?
Shouldn't they have been addressing the comments by Air Force
Brigadier General Arthur Exon, Air Force Colonel Edwin Easley,
and Air Force Colonel Patrick Saunders rather than focusing
their attention on Dennis and Ragsdale.

 >Here's something else it has to do with: the GAO didn't uncover
 >evidence of any alien bodies at Roswell, either. Nor, as I
 >recall, evidence of witnesses being intimidated. Is it your
 >studied opinion, then, that GAO=AF, ie, dishonesty, cynicism,
 >etc, in every instance and all the time, or just in UFO matters?

But when you look at the GAO report, you notice that they didn't
try very hard. They didn't even explore some of the leads
provided by others that could have lead to possibly embarrassing
documents. They didn't even find a copy of the July 8, 1947, FBI
Telex that had no blacked out names. Everyone I know who is
interested has a copy that is clean.

 >Well, like you say, Jerry, life's more complicated than that.

 >>>Anyway, I look forward to ufology's reviews of Pflock's Roswell:
 >>>Inconvenient Facts and the Will to Believe.

 >>The first will be in IUR, I believe the very next issue of same.

 >Like I said, I look forward to it, too, which is more than I can
 >say of most UFO journals these days. A review of another
 >publication I was looking forward to in the IUR never appeared.
 >Hopefully, this one will. And hopefully, it won't be authored by
 >someone named Carey, Galganski or Schmitt.

But is this last really fair? While both Carey and Galganski
believe that an alien ship crashed, don't you think that they
have come to this belief fairly and that neither has knowingly
distorted the truth? And yes, we can predict that neither Carey
nor Galganski will like what they read in Pflock's book, but
don't you believe that both will take a hard look at the
information to determine the validity of it? And can't we
predict that Pflock's book will be negative, just as we could
predict that Klass' would be negative. The real question to be
answered is if all these gentlemen will be intellectually honest
enough to give the other side a fair look.

KRandle

PS: Yes, we know the ship sank but there are some interesting
stories by those who were there until the last minutes.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                   Another Day In The Land Of The Free...

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:40:40 -0400
Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...


I'd thought I was in America...

Towards the end of 1992, and nearing the conclusion of a very
highly decorated twenty-three year military career (where I
unflinchingly served the best ideals of our country), I
thoughtfully surveyed my contemporaries and superiors for ideas
regarding a satisfying and worthwhile contribution I could
continue to make subsequent to my impending retirement. The
response was virtually universal. Teaching, they all said --
almost to a man and woman. Teaching was what I needed to do.

Clearly an extension of my successful previous occupation, I saw
the wisdom (and the honor) in the advice. Upon my retirement, I
immediately returned to college to secure a teaching credential
in an area where I determined the greatest need. I attacked that
academic objective as I would have any military objective --
diligently, intelligently, and imaginatively. I subsequently
graduated with that degree in education while receiving the
highest honors.

I applied myself strenuously to what I must describe as an
extremely enlightening edification rich in the history of
western civilization, certainly, as it pertains to the treatment
of the *least* of us by the *rest* of us, not to put too fine a
point on it. So, my considered specialty was the education of
the special needs person from preschool through high school and
beyond. The dismissing unwashed and dismayingly uninformed label
my very thoughtfully chosen career track as "special education."

As I said, I applied myself to the task. In the entire process I
received only one (decidedly humbling) "B". Along with this
exceptionally high grade point average I can easily say that I
had the respect and appreciation of ALL of my instructors and
professors, took full advantage of the academic college
experience, and derived a virtual Master's worth of value from
my bachelor of science degree. I reached, sir or madam, and it
changed me. My horizons got a LOT wider than I would have
predicted. Humorously -- I understand why it's the students and
teachers who always seem to start the social riot of revolution
. . . so please FORGIVE my intensity and passion regarding this
matter. I am, after all, the party injured.

Most would argue that I was a shoe-in for a quick position as a
school teacher. Indeed, I was reminded frequently all through
college by a cadre of counselors and observing teachers that I
was a "desperately needed minority" in a teaching field
experiencing an "extreme and continuing lack of qualified
personnel." ALL the published figures of their critical analysis
pointed to a "wide open opportunity" for a serious and sincere
person to involve himself devotedly in a quality public
education's service. ...No one seemed interested in recruiting
me, however. I found that admittedly unsettling, but
rationalizing it away, I pressed on. I should have seen the
handwriting on the wall.

Predictably, upon my eventual graduation (magna) there were,
essentially, no takers. I took the obligatory resume and
references around to the different school systems, and I entered
the local data base; I was treated, generally, like the
advantage taking carpetbagger or scalawag (for the exact same
reasons, I believe, upon educated reflection). I didn't get so
much interest (hardly) as a call in for a cursory interview. My
single substantive parlay (over an hour's drive away) resulted
in a six page letter of resignation for ethical concerns
associated with that system (not my own), and is available to
the interested upon request. I deeply resent my provoked regret
for THAT whole affair, but I digress.

Finally -- I secured a position at two related schools as a
'substitute' teacher. The children were pre-school through the
sixth grade (including, of course, the special needs kids), and
I was at least having much of the JOY of teaching if NOT the day
to day responsibility for it. I was in the second year of the
experience, and it seemed to be going nicely. I was getting
along well with (near all of) my fellow teachers and all of my
academic superiors. I was getting frequent accolades and
expressions of appreciation on my attitude and initiative from
parents and teachers . . . when, by special delivery mail one
Saturday morning after a week of inexplicable (to me)
inactivity, I was abruptly FIRED.

I was astonished. The admittedly questionable events of the
preceding weeks did not prepare me for this eventuality at all.
I was completely blindsided.

I won't say I didn't bring it on myself, sir or madam, but at
fifty-one years, and while realizing fully that I was starting
(and staying) at the bottom in a new career track, I still have
an aversion to someone pouring water on my leg and telling me
it's raining. I'm also keenly interested in UFOs, but why should
that matter to anyone? Justified written expressions of my
provoked irritation with an arbitrary system and autocratic
individuals include record memos of calm rationality regarding
immature behaviors on the part of persons trying to deal
autocratically with me, or running over me, or just treating me
with less respect than I would be expected to treat them. These
papers are also available upon request. As an aside, everyone
deserves SOME kind of due process, especially those with no
other protection, shelter, or recourse. A substitute teacher in
ANY school system is in the preceding category.

Honestly, as a seasoned and trained human relations counselor in
my own right (involved at all levels in the process of an
efficacious transition of psychological adolescents into
competent women and men, individually cooperating in efficient
teams) I had a reasonable and experiential basis to work from
regarding the utility of ethical treatment and the rewards of
fair play. I'm not a mean spirited person and I'm not spoiling
for a fight, but you'll hear me if you step on me. I'm not shy.
It's the American way.

At issue? Recently I had the opportunity to substitute in one
class of the fourth grade for six continuous days. I thought it
went extremely well. This resulted in a reported (though
completely unsubstantiated) "FLOOD" of complaints, following the
experience, allegedly from members of the "school board", fellow
"teachers", and concerned "parents." The bone of contention --
the highlight of all these converging torches and pitchforks,
was my public WEB site, a site devoted to UFO's and critical
social commentary. I suspect, rather, common high school
clique-ishness of the piqued arbitrary as a more likely culprit
-- a memo also on request, but that's another digression.

As regards the offending WEB site . . . I am proudly unashamed
of my WEB site, which is academically "G" rated, and contains NO
references to gratuitous sex, violence, or drug use. I KNEW kids
could go there (indeed, been GOING there for over a year)! There
is NO need for parental concern -- no need for a nanny filter.
There is NOTHING on my site that they cannot see on main stream
Saturday morning TV, TDC, TLC, THC, PBS, and A&E , or ANY
middle-of-the-road coffee table magazine. Moreover, while my WEB
site is, in a literary sense, WAY over the head of the gifted
fourth or even sixth grader, it is STILL a splendid display for
original and inspiring art works IN NO WAY suggestive or
prurient, and a GREAT example of what can be done with the most
original and freedom producing medium since the invention of the
printing press! My site is an academic SHOWCASE (I not so humbly
submit!) used in the exact same fashion as it was used the
ENTIRE last year without complaint from the referenced parents,
teachers, and school board members. Astonishingly, I'd bet my
site can be found on some of those classroom computers, still.

That was the thrust of ANY mention of my site, AT ALL, was that
it was topical, by the lesson plan, and in accordance with valid
discussion on the uses of computers in everyday life --
something the student could do, create on his or her own . . .
for FREE! I'm not directing the children to my site, so much --
rather providing tangible demonstrations for what THEY can do
themselves with a technology that is bearing down on them like a
proverbial freight train!

Additionally, as convenient enhancement for a teacher's referent
quality, it was helpful to inform them that I was an "award
winning artist" and a "prominately published" author able to
better encourage their appreciation for their own hard work...
when they were complaining about their Art curriculum being too
academically heavy this year, or what a chore critical reading
and writing were, for instance. I was able to demonstrate how
knowledge of the scope of computer generated art, for example --
depth of field, the effects of light and shadow, vertical
position in the field et al, provided them with a new and more
efficiently productive way to look at their evolving and
accelerating world.

Expanding a young persons horizons, encouraging a self kindling
desire to immerse themselves in the writing/reading process and
providing them with an interesting demonstration that counts in
the real world -- written and oral communication plus good, real
world and immediate reasons to get INTERESTED in these things?
That's what they allegedly go to school for . . . isn't it? I
worked hard to make it as interesting as I could. I tried to
sweep the individual child up in a self generating interest.
That's my thrust! The mere vehicle for encouragement of student
interest is my rational interest in anomalous aerial phenomena
and exobiology. My WEB site is NOT "inappropriate" for the
purpose of encouraging student interest. I bitterly resent any
suggestion that it is.

The clincher? Out of clear deference to mom and dad, I cautioned
the kids to check with their parents BEFORE logging on for an
unsupervised look. I did this VERY strenuously; I always do. I
am very responsible about that, forgetting for a moment that
there is no need to be concerned.

I am certainly more than willing and abundantly able to
rationally debate the courageous parent, teacher, or school
board member who has questions regarding the validity or the
appropriateness of the massive original contents on my site,
contents which would fill several books electronically published
in world class venues. This is forgetting for a moment that had
I been directed to stop using it as an example to students, I
certainly WOULD have -- while continuing my rational defense of
it to satisfy a simple sense of honor (or wounded pride). I'm
PROUD of what I do, what I have done -- what I create. No HIDDEN
agendas exist to subvert or corrupt. I stand by the true context
of all that I have painted or written. I've got good support for
learned convictions -- acquired in college and life's
experience, I stand by them. Lastly, I'm reasonable. I can be
shown an error. I can change.

But -- I'm for living and teaching, sir or madam, in a world
that is a marketplace of ideas and a realm of ever increasing
horizons and possibilities. The arbitrary autocratic was exposed
and made useless by the first world war, supposedly, and in the
twenty-first century it is the efficaciously strong-willed
individual who contributes to a stronger social web or
infrastructure! That's what I'm about, frankly -- teaching a
young person how to be a good leader in the twenty-first
century, or how to intelligently FOLLOW the good leaders that
they will. I aspire to the authoritative and eschew the
authoritarian. I have a lot of successful experience with that.
I'm good at it. I have hundreds of anonymous testimonials.
Perhaps some of the other teachers are content to teach good
"employees". I am not. I teach effective leaders, and as
everyone cannot be the leader, I correspondingly teach
intelligently critical followers.

To be so abruptly and decisively terminated (without clear
warning of any kind), and my career in education, as a result,
in sincere jeopardy (all but destroyed) is a source of _extreme_
disappointment to me.

I am exactly what the education system asked for. I have the
attendant respect for the process (demand it in fact), an
appreciation of the consequences for actions taken, and a desire
to promote and encourage a level playing field. I celebrate the
intelligence, capability, and imagination of an otherwise
maligned diversity, and I know the definition of a bigot. I'd be
an effective teacher, sir or madam; I've BEEN an effective
teacher for the better part of two decades.

I teach respect for all people in a manner that will transfer,
and my classrooms were a model of civility and purpose when I
officiated in them. The children were at attentive dress right
dress and at appropriate parade rest in all cases. I NEVER
remotely lost control of a classroom. Ironically, the only
comments from my superiors regarding the "appropriateness of my
classroom management techniques" were ONLY positive comments. I
didn't send kids to the office. I very seldom needed to.

Paradoxically, I report that I have received unsolicited offers
for excellent written recommendations from the Principal of the
one and the Vice Principal of the other schools as a testament
to the abrupt divergence I have very suspiciously generated. As
regards the job, I came early and I stayed late. I did much more
than was required for the very minimum wage. I aspired only to
be the model substitute teacher, to earn appreciation, and
achieve that very illusive idiosyncratic credit for more
responsible full time use within the system. It was not to be.

Frankly, I think my non-discretional maltreatment in this matter
was egregiously autocratic and arbitrary, a violation of moral
due process, and the very possible waste of six years of my
time. Indeed -- knowing what I know now (I could write a book,
and perhaps will) I would probably have involved myself in some
other kind of career field. As it happens, how can I be expected
to react upon blowing up in the minefield of a so capriciously
arbitrary an education *system*, anyhow? Feeling I've been
wronged, I speak out. I must. Anything else is an inelegant
agreement with the specious reasons posited for my abrupt
release and encouragement for similar autocratic and arbitrary
treatments to be suffered by persons that come after me.

Finally, I must ask myself how it is possible that a seasoned,
well traveled, highly and appropriately educated person cannot
break into a career field that, by ALL accounts, no one else
wants? How can this BE when I have satisfied every requirement,
touched every base, and filled every hole?  I suggest, perhaps
not so humbly, that I am merely standing outside the inequitable
arbitrary . . . and the problem is NOT mine. It can't honestly
be about UFOs, can it?

So why don't I teach? Apparently, I'm not to be allowed. Am I
that bad, far off the beam -- that much of a psychological
threat to children? I don't think so, people who know me
(recommended me for the job) don't think so. My guess is that if
we sat down over a coffee, you wouldn't think so, either. So
what's the real problem? If people can't be interested in the
peculiar occurrences happening around them (occurrences
otherwise shoved teasingly in their faces by a ubiquitous
corporate media) -- what's the point? Quality life is the
INDULGENCE of ones (law abiding) curiosity. Moreover --
curiosity NEVER killed the cat! That's another lie. It only kept
the cat FED!

In conclusion, how is it that an otherwise acceptable person in
this highly principled nation, a person loaded with quality
credentials (I add)... how can that person be denied the
opportunity to contribute something back to what that nation
says it so desperately needs -- quality teachers? Is it
justifiable that an interest in UFOs and related material can be
so damning and ostracizing? Apparently so. And if that's true,
doesn't that say a lot more about my society, than about me?

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

               Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Gonzlez

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:58:57 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:43:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Gonzlez


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:44:02 -0400
 >Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators

 >>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:02:44 +0200
 >>Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators

 >>Angela Thompson is the 17th person visited by the Grays inside
 >>Hopkins's house! And, what has he done, at least, to try to
 >>catch _them_ in the act? Absolutely nothing. What kind of
 >>investigator is he?

 >If it happened in your house, what would you do?

Can't you imagine? I wrote about that for the UFOIN competition
last year, and the winning entry also was along this line.

I would try anything, from the most sophisticated video camara
to the simplest flour on the floor. Even the default data
(non-working videos, etc.) would be a progress, we could
document very precisely (and even discover how it was done)
those EM effects that many (myself included) doubt. I put this
challenge (trying to design a perfect alien trap) to Dan Wright,
but he was not interested. Maybe the Updates readers would like
to make a try?

Just consider. The big prize would be to have the final proof,
but even if "they" are prove ellusive, at the very least we
would document that something strange is going on. For instance,
suppose you set human surveillance, they "switch off" the guards
and abduct the witness. At least, we would have proof of this
"switching off"!!


Yours,

Luis R. Gonzalez








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                 Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:23:34 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:46:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:36:02 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Sgt. Moody's Abduction


 >But did you see my reply to your Travis Walton/2001 post?
 >Walton certainly didn't say his aliens had normal eyes. He
 >didn't describe big-eyed grays, but found the eyes of his
 >aliens striking, unusual, and even (if I remember his quote
 >correctly)frightening.

Yes, I saw it, but could not answer in time.

You are moving the goalposts. The shape and size of the alien's
eyes described by Walton is the same that those of the 2001
poster (without eyebrows and eyelashes, but with a white cornea
and a dark iris). A total different thing are the sensations and
feeling such eyes gave Travis (striking, unusual and
frightening).

Who was the first to describe a total black eye? I am looking...
Betty Andreasson... no, but I have just discovered (by
serendipity, how I love this word) a different tack.

Thinking about LGM, I have noticed that the typical graphic
jokes about aliens, always gave them antenae. Just remember that
"Our Favorite Martian" also showed them. I always though it was
a metaphor for telepathy, but I wonder why they are not
mentioned in UFO abductions. Too much unbelivable?

And now, I have discovered that Betty Andreasson mentioned his
Quazgaa _had_ feelers! (p. 111, The Andreasson Affair,
paperback). Yes, she added that they could also be deep
crevasses, and they quickly disappeared in later drawings, but
they were mentioned. Any others examples?


Yours,

Luis R. Gonzlez









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:46:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:48:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:07:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Then there are the hundreds(?) of uncorrelated targets ignored
 >by the radar fence around the USA...programmed to search for
 >ballistic targets and ignore powered objects. The radar guys
 >don't report their "sightings" to ufologists for analysis. They
 >feel perfectly competent to reject "UFO sightings" on their own.


Bruce,

What is an ICBM if not a powered object? <BG>

The defense satellites detect in the infra red range, I believe,
but the software is programmed to sound an alarm only over
certain chemical "burn rates" or signatures that indicate a
rocket launch. The other activity is recorded, but not analyzed
by the AF because it isn't interested in same. This is the
database where the phrases "Slowwalker" and "Fastwalker" first
arose, I think. When the U of AZ scientists asked, though, the
AF did let them study some of the recovered data.

Obviously, we don't know everything about its operations but
this would at least tend to indicate that the AF does not regard
incoming UFOs as a threat on a par with ICBMs.

<snip>


 >Bottom line: "Science" may be detecting UFOs on its own, but
 >until "ufology" looks scientific, the scientists will keep their
 >own counsel and not approach the ufological community with any
 >possible detections.

Your other points are well taken. When I suggested science would
approach ufologists with their own findings, if any, I was, of
course, speaking...rhetorically.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                      Article On 6/2000 MBS Face Image

From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 11:44:54 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:50:36 -0400
Subject: Article On 6/2000 MBS Face Image


Last week I posted an article on the June 2000 partial image of
the Mars Face at:

http://www.vgl.org/webfiles/mars/face/01-2001/new-images.html

My belief about how searches for objects of possible ET
artifacts should be done is that it's the details that are
important, and if something shows details that are difficult to
explain by natural processes, an archaeological interpretation
cannot be ruled out. The "eye" structure on the western side of
the Face is one such detail, and only one of several regarding
the Face.

My timing wasn't very good on posting this web page, since I did
it just before the weirdness with NASA's letter to FACETS began
and the subsequent release of the full image of the Face taken
last April 8 and held in secret for six weeks by MSSS/JPL before
being released in the midst of an obviously well-orchestrated
JPL debunking campaign.

I will have more to write about this new image. For now, I'll
just observe that a Dr. Garvin with JPL has made a claim about
the resemblance of the Face landform to Middle Butte in the
Snake River Plain of Idaho and the claim doesn't appear to hold
up very well.

Carik Naltby, member of the Cydonia email list, found a link
that shows a picture of this butte at:

http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatlas/ida_histgeo/rrt/part2/s2c2p21.html

This is a side view, though, and I'm trying to get a satellite
image of it for a better comparison.

At least in this image, Middle Butte appears to be an
asymmetrical landform of the sort I've seen many photographs of
and bears no discernable resemblance to the high symmetry of the
Face platform confirmed by the new MGS image -- except that both
structures are real big. That's apparently enough of a
resemblance for NASA's purposes, though.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:13:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:52:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Clark


 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:07:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500


Bruce,

 >Bottom line: "Science" may be detecting UFOs on its own, but
 >until "ufology" looks scientific, the scientists will keep their
 >own counsel and not approach the ufological community with any
 >possible detections.

And as long as scientists on the whole (with some honorable
exceptions, such as your good self) refuse to participate in
ufology, ufology will continue to look unscientific. It's all
so splendidly self-serving, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:55:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:30:08 -0000

Dick,

 >In a private communication received today, James Easton has
 >threatened me (and two other parties) with a lawsuit for alleged
 >"defamation" in regard to criticism of his position on the
 >Socorro case as posted on the NICAP web site.

 >I think the List should know of the depths to which debunkers
 >sometimes will sink when you disagree with their statements.
 >Nothing I said is even remotely personal or actionable, and I
 >strongly stand by what I said.

 >This is very reminiscent of an incident a couple of years ago
 >when Gary Posner, barely noted CSICOP debunker, threatened me
 >with a lawsuit after I publicly (knowingly in his presence)
 >criticized CSICOP's unscientific behavior.

When I worked for Fate many years ago, James Oberg threatened to
sue over a critical article on UFO debunkers that David M.
Jacobs wrote in a book we put together (Proceedings of the First
International UFO Congress, Warner Books, 1980). Our publisher
was sufficiently scared that it canceled an intended second
printing of the book. Oberg had no case, but as we all know,
there is no "winning" in a slander suit by the time you've paid
off all the lawyers.

CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
lose.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                      Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:43:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:57:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research - Mortellaro


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:14:26 +1200


 >>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:36:12 +1200
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:18:02 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research - Sawers

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:22:04 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Just to clear up a couple of things that may have been
 >mis-understood.

 >I, like John wasn't advocating excluding anyone from the List
 >either.

 >Refer to my post to see, I was agreeing with John. It was really
 >a query as to why we seem to keep rehashing the same old same
 >old, and why the "unconvincible" stick around.

 >I see the debunkers/skeptics are a necessary evil :-) (?) (They
 >keep us honest and on our toes), but I stand by my statement,
 >"Whats in it for them?" and what sort of pleasure do they get
 >when they feel they've scored a point! It 's perverse and even
 >masochistic <g>I have been on a list where debunkers were under
 >pressure to leave and I would _never_ advocate that, but we
 >still must have the right to ask the question..."why?"

You attribute labels "necessary evil," (to skeptics etc), take
pleasure from scoring a point, perverse and masochistic.
Fascinating. In any scientific or other debate, this type of
attitude might very well be considered paranoia.

Has it occured that debate does _not_ keep us on our toes,
rather it keeps us thinking. And it does not keep us honest, we
are already so! Are we not??

Cogito, ergo .. our truth shall prevail in the face of all
adversity. This is debate, not a mutual abduction society.


Sheesh!

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:59:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:04:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

 >Dennis, Jerry, List -

 >If I might throw in my two cents here...

 ><snip>

 >But when you look at the GAO report, you notice that they didn't
 >try very hard. They didn't even explore some of the leads
 >provided by others that could have lead to possibly embarrassing
 >documents. They didn't even find a copy of the July 8, 1947, FBI
 >Telex that had no blacked out names. Everyone I know who is
 >interested has a copy that is clean.


Kevin,

What's that old saying about good enough for government work?

It's clear from the final results that both the Air Force and
GAO would rather have been doing almost anything other than
"investigating" Roswell, with golf no doubt ranking somewhere
near the top of the list.

The AF suggestion that the crash-test dummies may have accounted
for some accounts of alien bodies being recovered in the
vicinity of Roswell can be viewed in numerous ways. Absurd,
misguided, ludicrous... whatever. It's only fundamentally
cynical and dishonest if the AF knew that actual alien bodies
were recovered at Roswell and continued to deny it, by whatever
subterfuge or cover up. Otherwise, it mainly falls into the
realm of government work - another bungled attempt at PR.

If bodies were recovered at Roswell, no government authority is
likely to admit same in our lifetimes. At the same time, any
denial that bodies were retrieved can always be criticized - as
bungled, dishonest, cynical, whatever - because it doesn't fess
up about the bodies.

And it doesn't end there, does it? If you actually had bodies,
next you'd have to explain the whole Cold War thing. Why did we
fight over Korea, Viet Nam, Cuba, and engage in a massive,
nuclear missile build-out if we even _thought_ we might be
confronting an invasion from outer space? Makes no sense to me.

The truth of the matter is that there is no investigation of
Roswell that the AF could conduct or oversee that would satisfy
ufologists that included no admission of the recovery of alien
bodies and debris, which is what I suspect Klass was referring
to.

You can issue a single sentence of denial - for which you will
be doubted and criticized. Or you can issue a book-length
manuscript - for which you will be doubted and criticized even
more, simply because you generated more material for both. And
don't forget that past-history albatross around your neck.

The truth about Roswell could be learned in a single phone call
to Wright-Pat: You got bodies from NM or not? If yes, then the
cover up proceeds. If not, then the denials begin. For the
reasons adumbrated above, outsiders to that phone conservation
(I'm speaking metaphorically here) will have no way of
distinguishing whether the denials are true (and sloppy) or
untrue and sloppy. You've paid your money up to this point, and
you simply take your choice.

It's the exact same situation that Corso confronted the military
with. Do you issue a simple statement saying Corso's book has
"no foundation in reality," launch a lengthy investigation that
no one wants to conduct, or lay low and hope it blows over?

The same situation applies to someone like Easley. What answer
can the AF make, as an institution, if it just so happens that
Easely was wrong? They can't say he didn't make the remarks,
they're on record. But nothing they say can _explain_ Easley's
remarks. All they could effectively say would be something along
the lines of "we don't know." Now, would that be honest or not,
and how would you or any ufologist _know_? The answer is that we
wouldn't and couldn't - without confirmatory, physical
evidence. So, on the outside chance that no alien bodies were
recovered at Roswell, how does the AF produce a non-body? I
dunno, either. Crash-test dummies?

I didn't mean to go on so long, but, hey, it's Memorial Day.

 >Like I said, I look forward to it, too, which is more than I can
 >say of most UFO journals these days. A review of another
 >publication I was looking forward to in the IUR never appeared.
 >Hopefully, this one will. And hopefully, it won't be authored by
 >someone named Carey, Galganski or Schmitt.

But is this last really fair? While both Carey and Galganski
believe that an alien ship crashed, don't you think that they
have come to this belief fairly and that neither has knowingly
distorted the truth? And yes, we can predict that neither Carey
nor Galganski will like what they read in Pflock's book, but
don't you believe that both will take a hard look at the
information to determine the validity of it? And can't we
predict that Pflock's book will be negative, just as we could
predict that Klass' would be negative. The real question to be
answered is if all these gentlemen will be intellectually honest
enough to give the other side a fair look.

 >KRandle

Well, it was a cheap shot at least, and I shouldn't have made
it.

But in answer, I believe that George Bush believes in his tax
plan, too. I happen to believe it's voodoo economics. Does that
make the plan itself a distortion of the truth - or merely
wishful thinking?

I have no reason to believe that the above haven't come to their
beliefs fairly. I do have reason to believe they're certainly
held fiercely. And we all know what emotions do to objectivity.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                             Ravaged In The Corn

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:28:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:24:55 -0400
Subject: Ravaged In The Corn


"Come in she said, I'll give ya, shelter from the storm." All
those who seek shelter on UFO UpDates shall be ravaged in the
corn. And everywhere else on the planet. We continuously
complain of hearing the same old same old from skeptics. Is it
not interesting that we too, we who believe that our experiences
are quite real, say the same old same old. Nothing new.
Something that I have written on this list on a number of
occasions.

There is not one shred of anything new from either camp. And it
shows. Are we complaining that such is due to hearing (and
having to argue) the same old same old on numerous occasions?
That this causes a stagnation within us which precludes making
progress? Or worse, that we are missing the important points of
research by the debate? If so, do what others do. Hit "delete!"

The skeptics... they may say the same of our camp. "Hell, we've
heard nothing new from anyone in their camp and because of that,
we can't prove anything to their contrary!?"

Cop outs.

There are places on the Internet, sites where the abductee can
(theoretically) obtain that which he or she needs. And yet, all
I've seen on such sites (having audited several - the number
several is about four) there is nothing new there either.
Nothing. There is the opportunity for research by those
afflicted byt nothing happens except rhetoric, the rhetoric of
shared experiences in leiu of rhetoric combined common sense and
some honest evaluation of the shared experiences.

Same old same old.

No original thinking. No original theories. None. In fact in
some of these places, original thinking is stultified. Those
attempting to do that nasty? Ostracized, criticized and often,
castrated. Members having to toe another line of BS.

I offer nothing except the criticism of culpable stupidity. I
have few theories. And some of these are in the category which
some feel is... unacceptable. Tough. Got any bright ideas of
your own?

Say there... got nothin' to add? Good, then don't subtract!


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                Re: MGS Imaged _Entire_ Mars Face - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:32:20 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:30:58 -0400
Subject: Re: MGS Imaged _Entire_ Mars Face - Balaskas


 >Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 08:35:06 -0600
 >From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
 >Subject: MGS Imaged _Entire_ Mars Face
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >June 3, 2000: MGS Imaged The _Entire_ Mars Face

 >But Dr. Malin, in his infinite wisdom, just didnt see fit to
 >download the entire image to Earth. The ancillary data for
 >M1600184, the "partial" Face image, shows this. The ancillary
 >data can be accessed at:

 >http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/camera/images/01_31_01_releases/cydonia/anci
llary_f.tab

<snip>

 >It might even be suspected that Malin did in fact dowload the
 >full image but he didn't like what he saw on the eastern side
 >and just decided not to release it, altering the edit_mode in
 >the ancillary data to make it appear that the full image was not
 >received. But I don't know why he would do that, since the
 >eastern side of the Face is the part that appears to be the most
 >"ruined" in the second Viking image. I would think that Malin
 >would be eager to get a photograph of the eastern side because
 >it would be more likely to undermine the artificiality
 >hypothesis than these repeated images of the western side, the
 >latest of which shows the "eye" feature in close conformity to
 >what would be expected according to the artificiality
 >hypothesis. But then, Dr. Malin may know more about what's
 >really there than the rest of us do.

 >It's been observed by other people that it's almost as if Malin
 >has an aversion to photographing the eastern side of the Face.
 >This latest image does nothing to dispell that impression; he
 >clearly had an opportunity he chose not to take.

<snip>

Hi everyone.

We all know about the two MGS images of the Face on Mars taken
on April 5, 1998 (the so-called "catbox" image) and the latest
one taken on April 8, 2001 and released just a few days ago.

There is another MGS image of the Face that was taken on June 3,
2000 which shows only the left half of the Face.

In his February 26, 2001 e-mail to UFO UpDates, Lan Fleming made
some interesting observations regarding this partial image. Has
it been established that the entire Face was indeed imaged but
only the left half was made available to the public? If this is
true, it would seem that Dr. Malin and NASA wanted to keep the
right half of the Face a secret for a much longer time. Why?

By encouraging the public's continued attention to the Face as a
probable artificial structure, maybe they wanted the public to
overlook some other strange features on Mars which, as Arthur C.
Clark suggests, may be evidence that life exists there now.


Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:40:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:32:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 10:07:48 -0500

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500

<snip>

 >Yeah, it's that pesky sense of history that just keeps me
 >skeptical about the AF, not to mention its lame claims about
 >Roswell.


Jerry,

Actually my post was an Ideologue Test. The exercise was to see
whether I could say anything non-condemnatory about the AF on
this board w/o being flamed as an apologist or PR flack. And w/o
having my grammar corrected, of course.

As for that pesky sense of history, there's an old Sufi story
(all Sufi stories are old, so I guess you could say it's
historic) that goes like this:

Mullah Nasruddin goes into a Turkish bath. He's treated
abominably, but graciously leaves a gold coin as a tip.

The next time he returns, the gold coin still in their memory,
the attendants treat him like a prince, anticipating his every
whim. He leaves them a copper coin.

What's with this, they demand. The first time we treated you
like a peasant and you left us a gold coin. Now we treat you
like a prince and you give us a penny?

Ah, says the Mullah, this tip was for the first time! That tip
was for this time.

Meaning, among other things (don't let yourself be "reward"
programmed, etc), this is Memorial Day. Overlook the penny
(Roswell) and be thankful for the gold.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                        Re: Talk And Action - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:41:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:34:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Sparks


 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:07:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000


 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>>Ufology has this rather provincial, insular notion that if
 >>>science would just come over here and take an honest look at
 >>>what we've got, things would change. This totally ignores the
 >>>fact that science _should_ be detecting this stuff on its own,
 >>>coming to us, and asking, "wow, look what we got here! Got
 >>>anything like that in your database?" Again, _if_ UFO events
 >>>were as common and profligate as much of ufology insists they
 >>>are.

Dennis, Bruce, List,

Scientific instruments in general are geared toward looking for
very specialized phenomena in very narrow windows of
observation. Military surveillance equipment and sensors _do_
look over a wide range and attempt to broadly cover large areas
or the entire globe. The output data are almost always highly
classified. Some incidents have leaked out so we know these
systems _are_ picking up UFO's, e.g., the DSP satellite tracking
on May 5, 1984, still highly classified and was baffling even to
Phil Klass (who could only suggest an SR-71 but it seems the
object was in deep space not the atmosphere), and the Defense
Meteorological Satellite photo of Oct 11, 1978 (see Bruce's
website for his exhaustive analysis).

I would add only a few comments to Bruce's excellent remarks:

 >I suspect that "science" is detecting these things on its own.
 >More properly , scientific experiments detect anomalies but the
 >scientists involved, not being aware of the "Wealth" of UFO
 >data, assume that there is something wrong with the instruments
 >or they think that "this is the only one" and "I don't dare tell
 >anyone." It may be like a situation with amateur astronomers
 >some 30 years ago. In Sky and Telescope no one was discussing
 >UFOs until someone wrote a letter to the Editor describing a
 >strange event in the sky. Subsequently others wrote to report
 >their own strange events." I recall checking up on a couple of
 >these by communication with the people involved. Learned of a
 >daylight sighting of "Jupiter" that resulted in a photograph of
 >"Jupiter". According to the witness, moments after the
 >photograph "Jupiter" split into two parts and these parts
 >whizzed away from one another into the distance. I doubt that
 >any of the other Sky and Telescope readers found out the details
 >about this sighting that I found out.. I also assume that none
 >of them, including the witness, was aware of "splitting UFOs" in
 >the literature.

Do you have a report or analysis of these sightings reported to
Sky & Telescope, Bruce?

 >Another case: the Condon report itself discusses an instrumented
 >sighting by a device intended to measure the brightness of the
 >twilight or night sky, as I recall. (Maybe they were looking for
 >comets?) (It was a scanning photometer on top of a Mt. in
 >Hawaii.)

This was the Mt. Haleakala Observatory case of Feb 11-12, 1966,
in the Condon Report (pp. 777-781), involving scanning
photometers used to scan the sky for airglow and zodiacal light.

 >This device recorded data every night. Several of the
 >Condon people decided as a test, to study a day or so's worth of
 >these data to see if something unusual turned up. As it turned
 >out, they found an unidentifiable light they terms Unidentified
 >Bright Object. UBO.

That is correct. See CR p. 777: "Colorado project scientists
thoroughly searched two such photometer sky surveys. The first
search was made on an airglow survey chosen at random.... A
search was made of the taped output of an airglow photometer
survey recorded around midnight, Hawaiian Standard Time (HST),
11-12 February 1966 in order to see if all bright objects could
be identified as stars or planets. This survey was chosen at
random from a sample of surveys made under particularly good
conditions, that is, on nights during the dark of the moon with
minimum interference from clouds."

In other words, the Condon Committee hit the jackpot on its very
first try in selecting a date to examine! The Committee did
_not_ examine years and years of scanning photometer data, but
only _two_ nights' worth (the second date was chosen because the
astronomers reported seeing a bright light, but it turned out to
be a missile launch from Vandenberg AFB; interestingly, one of
the two photometers failed to detect the missile because the
filters were in the red part of the spectrum).


 >To find this UBO they had to go to the
 >trouble of analyzing every recorded light track and to identify
 >all of the star trails, etc. This was a time consuming project
 >which would not have been done ordinarily. In other words, this
 >UBO would have been ignored if it hadn't been for the fact that
 >the scientists involved were alert to the possibility and were
 >actually looking for anything unusual.

The Condon Report explains the reason why UBO's or UFO's are not
investigated by the scientists running instruments such as the
photometer sky surveys (CR pp. 776-7):

   "In practice, however, identification [of UBO's] is rarely
   carried out because investigators of airglow and zodiacal
   light are interested in diffuse light phenomena rather than in
   single bright objects."

This was explained at greater length in the same chapter in the
Condon Report on "Instrumentation for UFO Searches" which reads
like something from James McDonald or J. Allen Hynek though
highly skeptical (CR pp. 762-3):

   "... the investigator the investigator tends to disregard all
   data from his instruments that are irrelevant to his
   predetermined goal. An air traffic controller, for example,
   concentrates on radar echoes that he feels quite certain are
   those that come from those aircraft for which he is
   responsible.

   A meteorologist focuses his attention on quite different data
   on the radar scope: thunderstorm, tornado, and frontal
   activity.

   The military observer pays less heed to natural phenomena and
   concentrates on data on the scope that might signify the
   approach of ballistic or orbiting bodies.

   In other words, almost all investigative processes begin with
   a built-in "filter" designed to minimize whatever, for the
   investigator concerned, constitutes "noise."

   But one man's noise is frequently another man's data.....

   This filtering process turned out to be at work when
   researchers in atmospheric physics examined the read-out of a
   scanning photometer, an instrument normally used in studies of
   airglow....

   Would the operator of the scanner notice such a trace? Or
   would he ignore it, along with the star and planet "noise"?
   Since his attention is focussed on the traces that indicate
   airglow, it seemed likely that he would fail to notice any
   trace attributable to an UFO.

   This proved to be the case. Examination by project
   investigators of a zodiacal light photometer read-out made at
   the time of a visual sighting revealed four spikes in
   successive scans that could not be attributed to stars or
   planets. The personnel analyzing the data had ignored them.
   [This turned out to be the missile launch on Sept 11, 1967.]

   But even if the operator of an instrument fails to notice
   what, to him, is noise, another operator employing the same
   device for a different purpose has access to all the recorded
   data and can therefore search for the specific information of
   interest to him.

   As demonstrated in the case of the scanning photometer [on Feb
   11-12, 1966], the instrument _can_ be employed to provide a
   record of an UFO that can later be subjected to scientific
   analysis. [Condon Report's emphasis.]

   Not all existing instruments, however, have adequate resolving
   power or other design features for effective searches for UFO
   phenomena.

Here we find an actual case history of how observers at Mt.
Haleakala Observatory "ignored" their own instrument data
readouts of their visual sighting, which when investigated by
the Condon Committee turned out to be an IFO (ICBM missile
launch), and how the Observatory wasn't even aware of another
"UFO" incident recorded by their instrumentation which when
found by the Condon Committee was able to be, quote, "subjected
to scientific analysis."

Here, by the way, the UFO percentage rate was 50%.


 >Then there are the hundreds(?) of uncorrelated targets ignored
 >by the radar fence around the USA...programmed to search for
 >ballistic targets and ignore powered objects. The radar guys
 >don't report their "sightings" to ufologists for analysis. They
 >feel perfectly competent to reject "UFO sightings" on their own.

See Condon Committee's comment (above).

 >And what happened when an imaging telescope in Hawaii in 1995
 >got video of a strange set of lights moving through the night
 >sky? Did they immediately run to the ufologists and say "what is
 >this?" or "Wow, look what we got?". No. The video was "leaked"
 >to Nightline which took 6 months to decide to use it on the
 >night that the INDEPENDENCE DAY move was to open. One month
 >before that they had contacted me about it... after having the
 >video for about 5 months...and they wanted an "on camera"
 >instantaneous analysis (would not let me see it before they
 >videotaped me for the show). This was all described in a paper I
 >wrote for the MUFON Journal (Nightline UFO) in late 1996.

I'd like to see this case analysis.

 >Point is, the scientists who got the video originally didn't
 >know "how to:" investigate a "UFO" sighting, so they did their
 >own thing, decided "airplane" was a useful explanation, and shut
 >up about it. At least most of them did... someone obviously
 >didn't buy the airplane explanation. (He/she should have.)

 >Bottom line: "Science" may be detecting UFOs on its own, but
 >until "ufology" looks scientific, the scientists will keep their
 >own counsel and not approach the ufological community with any
 >possible detections.

Agreed. Even the Condon Report supports this (see above, again).


Brad Sparks









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                     UFO Sightings OZ Files 29th 5 2001

From: Diane Harrison <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:12:24 +1000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:40:22 -0400
Subject: UFO Sightings OZ Files 29th 5 2001


Hi everyone

My ability to do regular UFO sighting post will be disrupted for
the next 3 weeks as I am moving into my new house.

If at any time you would like to contact AUFORN in the next 3
weeks please contact Jan Stone AUFORN QLD State Director E-mail

lavender@primus.com.au

I hope you enjoy the below sightings we have had a great deal of
work to do through out Australia in the past month.

Thank you to all that have contributed to these reports.

See you in 3 weeks

________________________________________

UFO Sightings OZ Files 29th 5 2001

NSW  Web Sight UFO Report
Refer 1800 callin code: 01385.

Date Reported:  Fri, 04 May 2001 06:07:03 +0700
Suburb: Baulkham Hills NSW
Background: Ba psych Macquarie
PLC Sydney - 1999

3rd .4 May .2001
Time: 22:10
Duration: 22:20
What_happened: large orange light passed across sky
for about 10 mins,then as it flew to right hand side of vision
pieces broke off and skewed downwards towards earth.
8 other people on balcony saw this.
Unusual: unusual lights, moving slower than planes
Location: on a balcony watching the sky, through binoculars
Other_people: David A, Craig D, Sarah C, jess el, Dr P,
Sharelle P, Adam P
Weather_conditions: some clouds, but object in clear sky
Physical_stuff: circular, bigger than a plane, looked like a
  ball of fire, but it changed trajectories.

Report:

Original sighting seen low in the sky, not a plane.  Object
appeared to have an orange glow with black dots when
viewed through binoculars. No tail was observed as it changed
trajectory doing angles.  The object appeared to avoid plane
flight paths, although it appeared much higher than the planes.
Duration of sighting 10 to 15 minutes.  Earlier in the day
witness mother saw two orange lights, perfect circles of light,
with defined edges hanging stationary in the sky, but moving
apart and together whilst staying close together.  The objects
were very bright and appeared big and a long way away.
Duration of sighting was at least 5 minutes at approx 5pm
3rd of May.
Regards Doug Moffett
Australian UFO Research Network State director NSW

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting Blacktown NSW

Followup  1800 Callin Code: 001018 16.11.2000

Date:  16.11.2000
Day:  Thursday
Time Reported: 1.33pm
Location: Blacktown, NSW
Reportee: John
Investigator: Karen Burden
Tel: On file

Report:

John rang in regard to an incident that happened
around 12 years ago.  He was gardening in his
backyard at Blacktown during the day.  It was either
during Autumn or Spring, he cannot recall the time line.
John was leaning on a rake when he noticed a ball
of light in the western sky, he stated it looked like a
star and was electric blue.  It commenced moving
to the East for a few seconds then gradually turned
to go North.  He then went inside to get his wife.
When they came back out it was back near the position
where he first saw it.  But he said it was bouncing up
and down and moving like a 'song ball guide' for
about a minute.  He said it looked very strange indeed
doing that, it even looked bigger.  It then proceeded to go
North-East and slowly ascended then all of a sudden took
of like a bullet.

He always thought what he saw was strange, but was
not sure whether to report it or not and if so, who too!

Regards Karen B.
AUFORN NSW State Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO sighting Eight Miles Plains Brisbane

Follow up 1800 Callin Code: 01352 22.4.01 QLD

Date: 16.4.01
Day:   Monday
Time Reported:  10.35 pm
Location:  Brisbane Qld,
30-40o from horizon, approx 10-15 kms away
Reportee: Chris S.
Report given to nearest rep:  Emma Derdak
Witness:  1 other
Tel: 334
Message :

Report

Chris & a friend were outside and observed
2 lights in the sky, north-east of Eight Mile
Plains, coming towards them.  Looked like 2
aircraft with landing lights - then started to go
due west, coming a couple of kms apart, then
went north-west. Appeared to have quite bright
lights which would occasionally blink out.

Chris phone dthe local control tower at 10.43 p.m.
and asked him if any aircraft were registered, and
was told no, that ATC have to be notified of all
movements.

Following week - 23rd, Chris went outside at
10.15 p.m. and saw 2 lights - east-north-east, 30o.
Lights came closer together, moving up & down,
swapping over.  Chris watched this for 10 minutes,
and observed one light to drop 'like a rock' 5-7degrees
in sky & appeared to move away at a 90 degree
angle away & up.  The other light stayed there till
10.55 p.m. gradually moving away after seven minutes.


Regards Emm
AUFORN investigator QLD

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting Northern Beaches NSW

Follow up 1800 Callin Code: 01378 02/05/01 NSW

Date: 02.05.04
Day: Wednesday
Time Reported: 2007 (10:07 pm Brisbane Time)
Location:  Northern Beaches, NSW
Reportee: Bianca
Investigator

Report:

Bianca was outside her house when she saw a bright
orange/yellow light in the sky about 45 degrees above
the horizon and around the size of a five cent piece at
arm's length.  She stated it was moving very slowly, almost
appearing stationary at times. Some flickering of the
light was apparent. She called out to her boyfriend, Mum
and Dad to come out and see it. The other people came
out and saw it, then Bianca went inside to grab her
binoculars.  Just before she went inside she noticed a
plane traveling east, she then ran inside and by the time
she came back out the light had disappeared. Her mother
stated it just wasn't there anymore.  Her mother thought it
initially appeared to be over the suburb of Frenches Forest.
No one else in the family thought it was worth phoning up
about, but Bianca thought it was important enought to be
reported.

Regards Doug Moffett AUFORN NSW

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO sighting Loganholme Brisbane QLD

Follow up 1800 Callin Code: 01426  20.05.01 QLD

Date:  20.05.01
Day:  Sunday reported..sighted on Saturday 19th 5 2001
Time Reported:  7.45 pm  sighting 5.00am
Location:Crestmead Logan Brisbane QLD
Reportee: Greta & John
Report given to nearest rep: Diane AUFORN
Tel: 07 32
Report: Elizabeth saw strange objects in the sky.

Shape: round discs
Size: 10 cent
Objects: 12
Colour: orange
Sound: None
Speed: still
Duration: 10 minutes
Direction: North westerly
Weather: No clouds very clear
Witnesses: 2
Formation: Straight Line at least 30 cm apart

0.....0......0.....0......0......0......0......0.......0......0......0......0

Greta said: I got up to let my little dog out
to do a pee at 5.00am. When I stepped outside
I looked up at the sky to see what kind of day
it was going to be. That's when I saw these shaped
disc objects.

Well I raced in and got my husband to have a
look and he saw them also.

John said: I don't know what these things were
but they sure an't anything we have. They just
sat there shinning and doing nothing, they were
very still and soundless.

Greta said: I could see a helicopter moving towards
the objects it was as these objects became aware of
the helicopter because they just disappeared like
someone had turned of a light switch. Wow what a sight
we rang 4BH to see if any one else had seen them but
they told us no one had called in, but I guess not to
many people get up at that time.

John said: Shouted out these weren't ours that's
for sure.

This is still under investigation.

Regards Diane  Harrison
AUFORN National Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting Revesby NSW

Follow up 1800 Callin Code 01408 13.05.01 NSW

Date: 13.05.01
Day: Sunday
Time Reported: 7.08pm
Location: Revesby, NSW
Reportee:  Mark
Investigator: Karen Burden

Report:

On Sunday evening at around 6:58 pm Mark was
outside his house having a cigarete  and looking
up at the stars.  It was a clear night and while he
was watching he noticed a light in the sky, like a
large white star.  He said it just appeared, like
someone turned on a torch.  He said it was in
the North-West sky, stayed their for a second then
look off like a bullet to the West (horizontally).
He stated it didn't leave a trail not even a velocity
trail, which he thought was very odd.  Something
very similar was seen the same night by another
at around 7.:03 pm in Greystanes, near Parramatta.

Regards Karen B.
AUFORN NSW State Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting Blackheath, NSW

Follow up 1800 Callin Code 01412 15.05.01 NSW

Date: 15.05.01
Day: Tuesday
Time Reported 7.48pm
Location:       Blackheath, NSW
Reportee: Rowena
Investigator: Karen Burden

Report:

Rowena was on her way home to Blackheath from
Springwood on Monday evening with her two children
one 14 years and the other 5 years.  It was around
6.20  and just as she was driving into Linden (located
between Falconbridge and Woodford) her 5 years old
screemed out the stars are moving mummy.
Her eldest son and herself then noticed a red light in
the sky around the same height as the usual planes
that fly over.  This red light was on the left side of the
car, it then zig zagged very fast and flew over the other
side of the Great Western Highway, it then moved back
to the left.  They kept driving but noticed the object
started decending over the tree tops in front of their car.
The 14 year old stated that the object was triangular
(similar B2 Bomber), metalic grey in colour.

He stated the front light was yellow and the left and
right lights (2) were aqua and red (both sides) and not
flickering.  He also stated it had either a black circle
or square centred on the undercarriage.    When they
reached the same position as where it flew over, they
noticed a tall thick tree was on fire, but only the top of it.
Rowena stated it had no branches on the top and it
was glowing like orange embers, as if it had been burning
for a long time. After they noticed the tree, they lost sight
of the object.  All told they had watched the object for
around 10 minutes.

Regards Karen B.
AUFORN NSW State Director


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting Northern Beaches Sydney

Follow up 1800 Callin Code: 01400 10.3.01 NSW

Date:  10.3.01 (the date must be in error)
Day:  Thursday
Time Reported: 8.39am
Location: Northern Beaches,  NSW
Reportee:  Sue
Investigator:  Karen Burden

Report:

At 4.00 am on the 10th May Sue saw a bright white
star like light in the Eastern Sky around 25 to 30
degrees above the horizon. She said there was cloud
cover, but that this object seemed to be below cloud
cover.

Sue said it was 10 times larger than a star and was
positioned over the ocean. She noticed it twice in a
period of 45 minutes and then woke her husband to
see it.
It apparently looked at times as if it was expanding
and contracting.  Her husband grabbed the Video
Camera and taped it for around 10 minutes (no tripod).
Apparently on the digital video you can notice that the
object is round and that it expands and contracts like
a flower opening up.  Also noticeable is two vertical lines
which move across the object from left to right; this
however only occurred once.

Sue also stated she saw the same object on Saturday
morning around 5 am bearing 45 to 50 degrees above
the horizon.  They stated they would send video footage
as soon as possible.

This sounds like a known phenomena.  I am checking with
the observatory to see if it may be Venus in the North-Eastern
Sky at that time in the morning.  A video camera out of
focus may give the same visual effects as described by Sue.

Regards Karen Burden
AUFORN NSW State Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sighting St Lucia, Brisbane

Follow up 1800 Callin Code: 01411 12.05.01 QLD

Date:  12.05.01
Day:  Saturday
Time Reported:  7.48pm
Location: QLD
Reportee: Sue Sp
Report given to nearest rep: Emma QLD

Report

Objects: 1
Colour: White
Sound: None
Time:     6-7 p.m.
Location:  St Lucia Brisbane
Duration: couple of seconds
Witnesses: Sue & her son

Sue observed a strange light in the sky over
Brisbane.  The object travelled quite low and moved
straight across Brisbane & out to the bay area.
Sue was sure it wasn't a plane and hadn't encountered
anything quite the same before.

Regards Emma
AUFORN investigator QLD

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO sighting Malvem Victoria

My name is Steve and I live in Malvern,
Victoria. I am 27 years old.

On Friday 18 May 2001 I was driving to a client in
Reservoir, Victoria.  At approximately 8:10am AEST
I was travelling north-west on  Edwardes Street,
Reservoir.  I had just turned right at the round-about
from Gilbert Road (which cuts Bell Street).
As you turn from Gilbert Road into Edwardes Street
you will find Edwardes Lake.  This is a fairly large lake.
Whenever I drive past the lake I like to have a look.
The exact location is Melway reference: page 18 D5.

On this particular morning, as I was looking at the lake,
I witnessed an unidentified object suspended about
15 degrees above the horizon approximately 3 to 5
kilometres north of me.  There was not a cloud in the
sky at the time.

The object could only be seen from the lake area on
Edwardes Street because the rest of the street is
surrounded by trees and tall industrial buildings.
Unfortunately this meant that the UFO was in sight for
only 20 to 30 seconds.  I could not stop the car due
to the heavy traffic on this single lane road.
I did have the opportunity to note the following about
the UFO:

� The object appeared to be motionless and suspended
at one point in the sky
� From my position it appeared to be a perfect �cigar� shape
� It did not have any wings but the shape was symmetrical
� The upper half of the UFO was silver or had a polished
metallic finish
� There was a white glow similar to a fluorescent light on the
underside of the UFO
� The features and shape of the UFO were sharp and distinct
� The area of the sky that I saw the UFO is a common
flight path
� The UFO could not be confused for a plane, bird or balloon
� I guesstimate that the diameter of the UFO was the length
of at least two to three large buses

Note that I made a detailed file note of the sighting within
1 hour of the experience.  This is a typed transcript of the
said file note.

Realising what I had seen begged further study I immediately
returned.  Due to traffic congestion it wasn�t until approximately
8:14am that I was in the same spot on Edwardes Street.
The object was no longer there.  It was nowhere to be seen
in the sky.

I have no doubt that what I saw was a UFO.  The experience
has made me question a few things about my life.  It has
caused me some stress in coming to terms with what
I witnessed.   End of report

Regards George Simpson
AUFORN VIC State Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UFO Sightings Fernvale VIC

Follow up 1800 Callin Code  01436 25.05.01 VIC

Date:     25.05.01
Day:      Friday
Time Reported: 10.00 p.m.
Location:      Vic
Reportee:      Femvale
Investigator:  State Director George Simpson
Tel:

This one was rung in at 6:03am on Saturday 26th May 2001.
The caller reported a very large bright object which remained
stationary , low on the eastern horizon for a few hours. None
of them realised it may be Venus. I've asked them to look
again tomorrow morning, in the same location, and to contact
me later if it's not there again.

( If a planet disappears overnight we are in serious trouble folks).

Regards George Simpson
AUFORN VIC State Director

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
Regards

Diane Harrison

National Director
The Australian UFO Research Network
and UFO Hotline.

Tel number 1800 77 22 88 a Free Call
Australian UFO Research Network -
http://www.powerup.com.au/~tkbnetw


A non profit organisation
P.O Box 805
Springwood Qld 4127









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:06:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:43:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Sparks


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 22:07:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:29:36 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:51 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Gates
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:52:21 -0400

 >>>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 02:43:36 EDT
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>><snip>

 >>>>I will go you one better, I see no evidence that convinces me
 >>>>that MJ12 exists/existed. Beside, the Ike Briefing document
 >>>>says that MJ12 was in liaison with the BB head. Should have
 >>>>been no problem for Menzel to get the material he need, if he
 >>>>was in such an outfit.

 >>>>Jan Aldrich

 >>>Hi Jan,

 >>>As you well know I am not convinced that MJ-12 actually exists
 >>>or ever existed.

 >><snip>

 >>>Just because a TS\Codeword program has a liason with another
 >>>program (say a program in another branch of the military that is
 >>>doing the same thing) doesn't necessarly give the TS\Codeword
 >>>program instant and automatic access to any and all documents
 >>>from the other program. Likewise within the same Codeword
 >>>program you don't automaticly have access to all documents, you
 >>>in fact only have access to what you have a "need-to-know."

 >>This makes no sense at all. Blue Book was not a TS Codeword
 >>program. MJ-12 was purportedly set up by Truman to control _all_
 >>UFO information, not just its own supposedly limited
 >>jurisdiction (by your theory).

 >Hi Brad,

 >I merely point out the facts about TS/Codeword programs and how
 >they operate. What I said is correct.

Hi Robert,

I think we're talking about different things. What you said is
correct but not relevant to Project Blue Book which was _NOT_ a
TS/Codeword project, but which, according to the bogus EBD and
other MJ-12 hoax documents, was set up for the MJ-12 Committee
to funnel information to MJ-12 - which supposedly included
Menzel as a member. The fact that in reality Menzel could not
get files from Blue Book and was blocked by the very person
claimed in the EBD to be MJ-12's "liason" [sic] with Blue Book,
its chief Edward Ruppelt, is proof that the EBD is a fraud and
cannot be explained away by normal classification rules and
compartmentation procedures since according to EBD's scenario
Blue Book/Sign/Grudge was set up for the very purpose of
providing a cover or front for quietly channeling UFO data to
MJ-12.


 >>>For example in our much talked about MJ-12, Doctor X has a MJ-12
 >>>clearance and he only has access to information concerning the
 >>>dead alien bodys and related. He would not have access or
 >>>clearance for items like guidance systems, or propulsion
 >>>systems, or weapons and so forth. Likewise somebody working on
 >>>the propulsion system would not have the clearance to look at
 >>>medical reports and photos of dead alien bodys. Usually the
 >>>people who "see and know everything" are usually the top 1-3
 >>>people in the program while the rest are compartmentalized.

 >>This again makes no sense. The MJ-12 Committee members were the
 >>top purported _policymakers_ who had to have access to _all_
 >>information in order to set UFO policy even if lower level
 >>personnel were all compartmented. Menzel was an alleged member
 >>of the MJ-12 Committee, not some lower level scientist
 >>consultant as you seem to be treating him here.

 >Incorrect. Doesn't matter how many so called top policy makers
 >there are. They would only have access to what they were
 >directly involved with as a general rule. For example _if_ MJ-12
 >existed you might only have had say the President and one or two
 >people that _saw_ and _knew_ the whole picture.

Again we're talking about different things. You're talking about
clearances in general. I'm talking about the alleged MJ-12
Committee having specific clearance for all governmental UFO
information and clearance for files from the Blue
Book-Sign-Grudge project specifically set up for MJ-12,
according to the EBD MJ-12 (hoax) document. Since MJ-12
supposedly controlled government UFO information and policy and
set up Sign-Grudge-Blue Book to channel UFO data to itself it
was "directly involved" to use your phrase.

 >For example. In Ben Rich or Clearance Kellys book they describe
 >the chain of command on the Stealth fighter project. They
 >described how the project was run in the skunk works (not even
 >the President of Lockheed was cleared to know), how they
 >reported to a one star AF general who then reported to the
 >SecDef, who then reported directly to the President. Kept out of
 >the loop was the VP, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the assortment of
 >AF ranking officers.

 >Harry Truman was not briefed on the Manhatten Project _until_ he
 >became President. In essence he didn't have a "need-to-know"
 >until he became President. Just because you are a so called top
 >policy maker doesn't instantly give you a "need-to-know."

It _does_ give you instant "need-to-know" if you are designated
by the President as having the "need" to know all UFO
information in government hands, as the EBD and other MJ-12
documents claim about the MJ-12 Committee, i.e., that MJ-12 had
a "need" for as much UFO information as possible and that
Sign-Grudge-Blue Book were set up for that exact purpose of
supplying MJ-12 with all possible UFO data.

The better analogy is to suggest that Gen. Groves or Oppenheimer
could have been refused files by a "Manhattan Project"
contractor or laboratory. No way. If Menzel had been in such a
position of authority on the MJ-12 Committee which was allegedly
cleared to have all US Government UFO information then he could
not possibly have been refused such data by a 1st Lieutenant or
Captain in charge of a low-level low-security non-compartmented
project that had been specifically set up to provide his MJ-12
Committee with all possible UFO information.

The original argument was over whether Menzel could have been on
the MJ-12 Committee which purportedly controlled UFO information
and policy in the U.S. and then be denied access to BB files
especially if MJ-12 according to the (bogus) EBD of Nov 18,
1952, had "liason" [sic!! dumbbell misppelling] with the head of
BB just for the obvious reason stated in the Eisenhower Briefing
Document (p. 5):

   "A need for as much additional information as possible about
   these craft, their performance characteristics and their
   purpose led to the undertaking known as U.S. Air Force Project
   SIGN in December, 1947.... The operation is currently being
   conducted under the code name BLUE BOOK, with liason [sic!!]
   maintained through the Air Force officer who is head of the
   project [Ruppelt]."

Clearly, the purported MJ-12 Committee member Menzel needed
"additional information" on UFO's and tried to get it from the
very project set up for MJ-12, Project BLUE BOOK, through the
very person designated as "liason" [sic] to MJ-12 for the
satisfaction of MJ-12's "need for as much additional information
as possible" on UFO's and that person (Ruppelt) denied MJ-12
Committee member Menzel access. This would be a violation of
BLUE BOOK's charter or very reason for existence under the
description given the MJ-12 EBD (if the MJ-12 scenario wasn't
fraudulent and a pack of lies).

Again this is damning evidence that EBD is fraudulent and that
Menzel was never a member of the MJ-12 Committee controlling all
governmental UFO information and policymaking. The fact that
Ruppelt tried to get Menzel hauled up on charges is still more
evidence that Menzel was no part of any high-powered UFO
intelligence operation for which Ruppelt was the liaison
(correct spelling).

Why couldn't Menzel just go to the MJ-12 Committee and have
Ruppelt's decision reversed? Why didn't the EBD note in its
purported briefing to President-elect Eisenhower that MJ-12 was
having difficulties obtaining UFO information from the BLUE BOOK
project/channel that had supposedly been set up for MJ-12?
(Answer: The hoaxer didn't know about Ruppelt's refusal of
Menzel, or if he did know about it he clumsily failed to think
about what an utter contradiction it made to the phony MJ-12
scenario he was fabricating and how he should have just left
Menzel off the MJ-12 list.)

In that densest concentration of outrageously impossible and
anachronistic frauds ever concocted in the UFO field to date,
the MJ-12 1st Annual Report, it clearly states (Annex B, p. 10):

   "Upon the creation of the MAJESTIC TWELVE GROUP by special
   executive order dated 24 September 1947, and given powers of
   authority by PDD/I-1 [sic], dated 26 September 1947, the Panel
   was empowered to convene and conduct a review of all available
   evidence and data collected by government and military
   intelligence agencies."


Clearly, the (nonexistent) MJ-12 Group had blanket clearance to
review _"ALL"_ UFO data collected by the government, which
obviously must include a low-level operation such as BLUE BOOK
that was set up for the very purpose of funneling such data to
MJ-12. Yet the Ruppelt refusal of Menzel stands in stark
contradiction to this phony scenario.

(BTW, the PDD's or Presidential Decision Directives, was a
series of national security policy directives established by
Clinton on Jan 20, 1993, and didn't exist in 1947. The MJ-12
"1st Annual Report" is marked as supposedly having been received
by Timothy Cooper on various dates from 1994 to 1995 - after
Clinton established the PDD series of directives. The document
hoaxer stupidly failed to realize that PDD's did not exist
before Clinton and thus he ignorantly projected them back into
time in the hoaxed document he assembled, the MJ-12 "1st Annual
Report," due to his incredibly sloppy and ignorant historical
research (if it can even be called "research"). This is just one
of hundreds of impossible anachronisms and utterly fatal flaws
in the "1st Annual Report," which in itself is a stupid blunder
in designation since that first page clearly contains obsolete
1947/8 info intermingled with the 1948 title, and with 1951 CIA
DCI report numbering, and 1951-2 agencies that didn't exist
before and/or after, and a stupid reference pointing to a 1954
date frame.)

 >In our country today the intelligence community budget is approx
 >30 billion dollars. Generally speaking 535 people vote to
 >approve or disapprove budget. Out of that 535 people only a
 >handful of people actually _know_ and _see_ what the
 >intelligence community is spending money on. Awhile back one of
 >the members of the Senate Intel committee (who does oversight on
 >the Intel community) said that their was only 3 or 4 people on
 >the entire committee who actually know and see everything while
 >others are cleared at a lessor level of access.

 >>>Bottom line is Menzel _may_ have had a MJ-12 clearance, and be
 >>>denied access to what would be considered by you and I as so
 >>>called basic information.

 >>No way, I don't buy it. Menzel did not just have purported
 >>"MJ-12 clearance" but was himself allegedly a member of the
 >>elite MJ-12 Committee.

 >Lets put it this way. "To your and myself's knowledge Donald
 >Menzel did not have a MJ-12 clearance." "We have yet to see any
 >evidence that he did..." That doesn't translate out to he did
 >not have. It translates out to we don't know.

I think you misread what I wrote. My point was that this is not
a question of some mere "MJ-12 clearance" if such existed, but
of Menzel's alleged full membership on the MJ-12 high-level
policymaking Committee (or Group as it's called in the EBD)
which would put him in a far more powerful position than simply
having a clearance since the alleged purpose of the MJ-12
Committee was to investigate and/or control all government UFO
information. I wasn't denying that Menzel had MJ-12 clearance if
in fact MJ-12 existed and if in fact he was a member of the
MJ-12 Committee.

 >Recall Stan's ground breaking work and discovery that Menzel
 >had to level clearances through the NSA. Note: The top level
 >clearances through NSA did not entitle him to access say to
 >DOD, USAF, or AEC information. It only entitles him to access
 >certain NSA information on a need-to-know basis only. His
 >NSA clearances would not have entitled him to access any
 >and all information classified under those clearences.

 >>>As to Bluebook we make the _assumption_ based upon what has been
 >>>released at the national archives that their was no highly
 >>>classified side to it.

 >>This is untrue. We have plenty of information directly from BB
 >>personnel who have been interviewed, BB's superiors whom I
 >>interviewed (Gen. Garland, Col. Bower, et al.), Ruppelt's
 >>papers, BB documents _not_ in the National Archives such as
 >>those in Hynek's files, CIA, etc., NONE of which shows any
 >>"highly classified" or TS Codeword type side to it.

 >The documents that would show a "codeword" side, _if_ it in fact
 >existed would be classified with such a codeword and not be
 >released with the publicly available BB documents.

Why wouldn't the "codeword" material be declassified and
released if any existed in Blue Book files? If the "codeword"
itself had to remain classified for some reason why couldn't the
records be sanitized and then still released? Lots of SECRET
Codeword and TOP SECRET Codeword documents have been released
over many years often with initial declassifications, say, in
the 70's, having the codewords sanitized out but later
declassified and released in full so we can now see such
codewords as UMBRA, TRINE, BRIDE, DINAR, SPOKE, VENONA, etc. Why
wouldn't Blue Book's hypothetical TS/Codeword or SECRET Codeword
status come out when assertedly the whole project was
declassified in 1974?

If Blue Book was a TS Codeword project then why in the world
would it collect something like 200,000 pages of documents and
never once stamp a single page with the TS Codeword? What was
the purpose of having a TS Codeword to control access to
documents if the documents weren't marked to control the access?
You can't tell me that given the bumbling incompetence of Blue
Book personnel such as Quintanilla, Gregory, Hardin and others,
that they _NEVER_ slipped up and stamped their supposed TS
Codeword on at least one of those 200,000 pages. And you can't
tell me they would _NEVER_ once refer to their TS Codeword
special access controls on the project in any of the literally
hundreds of pages of Staff Studies on the project, on its role
in the AF, and on the feasibility of transfer to other AF
agencies or other government agencies when obviously such a
"highly classified" aspect to the project (if such existed)
would be a major drawback to such transfer plans. Some of these
Staff Studies went up to and from the AF Asst Chief of Staff for
Intelligence. And if you tell me that the AF declassification
review panel simply removed the TS Codeword pages that slipped
through the cracks in the Blue Book file collection then where
are the Withdrawal Slips showing the removals and giving date
and authorization and clasification level?

Don't nitpick one or two items out of my list of nearly a dozen
categories of evidence that in _aggregate_ prove that Blue Book
was not a "highly classified" project and did not have a TS
Codeword side to it, which can be greatly elaborated upon.

I asked former Blue Book Chief Col. Robert Friend on March 13,
2000, if Blue Book was a compartmented access-controlled project
and he said it was _not_. You can say that he had to say that
because of security - but he admitted to me that he believed
there _was_ UFO information under special access controls
outside of Blue Book so why say that and not tell me BB itself
had access control intelligence data? - and it gets to be
ridiculous when considered with the mass of evidence indicating
Blue Book had no such special access control "codeword" status.

And I should also add that the Gen. Bolender memo of Oct 20,
1969, analyzing options for Blue Book's closure says nothing at
all about Blue Book being any sort of compartmented special
access program, and in fact indicates just the opposite when it
says that closing Blue Book won't affect any important UFO
intelligence reporting because UFO cases that could affect
national security are already reported through channels that are
"not part of the Blue Book system."

No one in the CIA I talked to who had direct contact with Blue
Book ever indicated that there was any need-to-know clearance
involved in getting Blue Book files, even when the AF attempted
to obstruct CIA access in Dec 1952 to prevent CIA from finding
out that it was being fed selective and manipulated UFO data -
Ruppelt had been forbidden to visit the CIA to prevent him from
passing on the material but no access controls were applied to
the documents themselves or to the project itself, it was simply
an ad hoc situation. The CIA simply sent a high-level team out
to Dayton to get the files, on Dec 12, 1952. Plus the CIA got to
meet the Battelle project personnel including Dr. Howard Cross.
An argument could be made that the AF-Battelle contract was
highly sensitive and yet CIA got hold of it by personal
visitation on site. So why couldn't Menzel who also visited Blue
Book in person, on site?

The whole notion that Blue Book could possibly be a TS Codeword
project flies in the face of its obvious role as a front or
cover for vacuuming up UFO cases and spewing out PR debunking
propaganda to the public.

 >If you go back into the NASA files on the Discovery Sat program
 >you will find absolutly no hint of any kind of "codeword" side.

That is incorrect. The Air Force - not NASA - provided the
Discoverer (not "Discovery") satellite cover for the CIA's
Corona recon satellite program. (Corso is the one who stupidly
thought NASA provided cover and I say "stupidly" because it's
not a minor oversight since Corso claims he was _personally_
involved and actually took over the project!) There were plenty
of "hints" of a "codeword" side to the Discoverer program right
from the start, when the Discoverer 13 capsule was recovered,
and when it suddenly went "black" after Discoverer 38 and no
more information was released yet orbital parameters showed that
the satellites continued to be launched.

Likewise, the VENONA codeword for NSA's decryptions of
high-level Soviet messages was first leaked in the late 70's but
the first actual VENONA document releases did not occur until
1995.

 >When the govt declassified the "Corona" project records suddenly
 >you have all sorts of records that until that point had never
 >existed so to speak. Also people that had been previously
 >interview by experts and researchers were now telling
 >information that they had previously not told anybody because it
 >was a highly classified code word program.

The CIA head of the Corona project, CIA Deputy Director for
Plans Richard Bissell, was quite open about the Corona project
and openly used the "CORONA" codeword in public interviews going
back to the 70's - long before the Corona project was
declassified in 1999. When I interviewed Bissell in 1979 he
openly used the CORONA codeword and talked about the project in
some detail.

 >>>If MJ-12 existed and _if_ it had a liason with Bluebook it may
 >>>have been the secretary or even some other person of a lessor
 >>>stature then Ruppelt or other Bluebook directors.

 >>That's not what the bogus Eisenhower Briefing Document says -
 >>it says MJ-12 had "liason" (stupidly misspelled twice by the
 >>hoaxer) with BB's head, _not_ a secretary or a lesser person
 >>than the BB chief Ruppelt.

 >I have been to the Eisenhower library years ago and noticed
 >typing errors and misspellings in documents I was going through
 >as part of Cold War history research. Needless to say I don't
 >get to excited by the misspellings and errors.

Find me even _one_ example of the word "liaison" mis-spelled as
"liason" in any such documents - meaning a misspelling by
someone who didn't know how to spell it and _not_ a mere
one-time typo.

 >As to the head of BB being the liason to the alleged MJ-12 a
 >couple of things are in order.

 >1) That someone at a AF project, whether the head of the project
 >or otherwise, liasoned with a TS/Codeword program is entirely
 >possible.

 >Just because you or I spoke to them or interviewed them does not
 >mean that they would tell us that information. They would likely
 >talk about the "publicly released side" so to speak.

Not so. See above.

 >2) _If_ Menzel had an MJ-12 clearance he would have had to
 >requested UFO information from Bluebook through his (MJ-12 if it
 >existed) channels. The question would have come up does he have
 >a need-to-know and for what purpose does he want the
 >information?

 >If you understand how classified programs work you could easily
 >understand how Menzel would not be entitled to BB information
 >even though he might have had an MJ-12 clearance.

Not so. See above. Don't make me have to repeat everything I
said above. 3









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther

From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:05:39 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:44:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Guenther


 >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 00:10:00 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


 >>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:02:26 +0200
 >>From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting


 >>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:53:17 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Additional (?) FOIA docs John Greenewald Jr's website
 >>www.blackvault.com

 >>http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb28.htm

 >>http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/1949/1949wpafb34.htm


 >Thanks for alerting me to these documents. I did not have them,
 >since they were in the WPAFB section of the BB/AFOSI file. (I
 >searched west coast districts that could have investigated. The
 >name of a witness is clearly present in one document. Now we
 >know that the sketch which appears in the Special Report was
 >actually drawn by a witness and not by one of the Battelle
 >analysts simply based on the description.

<snip>

 >Will post this material as an update to my web site
 >presentation.!

:-)

My English is not very good but I am glad that I helped out.

Thank you.

--
Just the Cases - UFO sightings database
http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/ufodb.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                        Re: Talk And Action - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:48:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Sparks


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 10:07:48 -0500

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500


 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500


 >Dennis,

 >>>You are a charitable man, my friend. Condon and Blue
 >>>Book could have used you in their p.r. offices. Maybe
 >>>you'd be so persuasive that we'd actually end up grateful
 >>>for lousy, dishonest explanations of UFO reports.

 >>Last time I looked, no one was talking about Condon and Blue Book.

 >No, of course not. We all know that ufology is the beginning and
 >end of all evil, and it's not polite to mention the high crimes
 >and misdemeanors of debunkers and pelicanists. I just don't know
 >what got into me.

 >>>>Of course, there was an alternative. The Air Force could have
 >>>>said, "Well, to tell the truth, we think these people are, uh
 >>>>liars, or, if you prefer, simply exaggerators."

 >>>What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
 >>>its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
 >>>or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
 >>>advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
 >>>for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

 >>And no one will ever match you for your reading of the AF
 >>report... What is cynical about not calling people liars, which
 >>would have only invited lawsuits? Did you think the AF was
 >>stoopid, too?

 >Huh? What lawsuits? Can you cite a single instance in which the
 >Air Force or Blue Book was sued for calling an alleged UFO
 >witness a liar? Talk about cynicism - maybe you _are_ even more
 >cynical than the AF. Ufologists get slammed for just about
 >anything they do, but you just can't bring yourself to criticize
 >the Air Force, can you, even when it uses bogus testimony to
 >support a ludicrous theory, or when you have to contrive a weird
 >and lame rationalization for its behavior?

 >>But, wait a minute, you say ufology has debunked these accounts
 >>of bodies (after being the first to promote them). So, what is
 >>it, exactly, that the Air Force is guilty of in _this_ report -
 >>not admitting that they actually have bodies?

Have you ever heard of a "straw man" Dennis? A straw-man
argument is a weakened or fictitious imitation of an opponent's
true position that is designed to be easily knocked down because
of its flimsiness. It carries the connotation that in so doing
the opponent will be exposed to humiliation and ridicule at the
absurdity of the opponent's position - as misrepresented, of
course.

The AF set up a classic "straw man" argument by first elevating
and promoting an already discredited set of Roswell witnesses
about "alien bodies" as if they were still credible, as if they
were on an equal level of credibility with all of the other
Roswell witnesses. Then having done that, the AF proceeded to
demolish the "straw man" argument it had set up. (Interestingly,
the AF did exactly the same thing to the CIA with the Robertson
Panel, so there is a precedent for it.)

That is what the AF is guilty of here. I'm surprised you can't
see that.

<snip>

 >The AF is guilty of using suspect and bogus testimony to advance
 >an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Why is it so hard
 >for you to imagine that somebody might legitimately object to
 >that? I will give the AF credit for one thing: by implicitly
 >acknowledging that the testimony about bodies needed addressing,
 >it conceded that the question is a legitimate one, even if the
 >answer it provided is not.

<snip>

 >>Simple question: do you think they currently have in their
 >>possession alien bodies from Roswell, given that ufologists
 >>have debunked so many alleged Roswell "witnesses" who claim
 >>that they do?

See, Dennis, you admit that "ufologists have debunked so many
alleged Roswell 'witnesses' " who claimed there was a recovery
of alien bodies.

 >>If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
 >>say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
 >>Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
 >>Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
 >>Answer? They can't.

It's a matter of trust. The American people by large percentages
do not trust their government to tell the truth and they have
good reasons for that - lies told in Watergate, POW-MIA's,
Iran-Contra, Travelgate, Whitewater, the latest FBI revelations
of withholding thousands of documents from both the
_prosecutors_ and the defense in the McVeigh case (culminating a
long history of FBI dissembling on documents). Hundreds of
scandals and controversies. UFO's are just one in a long line.

To regain that trust that has been lost by its longstanding
proven dishonesty the Air Force needs to begin by being honest,
obeying "the law" that it and other agencies love to shove down
the throats of private citizens but hate to obey when citizens
try to make them comply (FOIA is one such law), and releasing
all UFO information regardless of classification (whether TS
Codeword or whatever) that is over 25 years old and without
asserting any blanket exemptions from disclosure - to comply
with the administrative law in Executive Order 12958, sec. 3.4,
that requires that classified information in records "more than
25 years old":

   "shall be automatically declassified whether or not the
   records have been reviewed."

EO 12958 sec. 3.1(b) defines "automatic declassification" as
follows:

   " 'Automatic declassification' means the declassification of
   information based solely upon:

       (1) the occurrence of a specific date or
      event as determined by the original
      classification authority; or

       (2) the expiration of a maximum time frame
      for duration of classification established
      under this order.

As a good faith measure, the AF should also declassify and
release all UFO information less than 25 years old on an
expedited review basis and not withhold anything except that
pertaining to extremely serious national security dangers such
as revelation of methods of constructing weapons of mass
destruction (which is absurdly unlikely to be found in UFO
data).

Then, as to regaining public trust over Roswell, the AF can
start by locating the Roswell material that was admittedly
recovered and explaining with contemporaneous records the chain
of custody of the material.

And, Dennis, I would very much appreciate a response to my post.
You've been ignoring my previous responses. These take a lot of
time to research and write and I'm frankly getting quite tired
of the same old arguments getting rehashed and having to be
refuted with the same evidence and argument without any
resolution or even acknowledgment (here I'm referring to your
arguments on why science doesn't recognize UFOs as a legitimate
subject, which I've just refuted for about the 4th or 5th time).


Clear answers,

Brad Sparks









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

               Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sawers

From: Williams Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:00:51 +1200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:50:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sawers


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:14:34 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis


 >Someone recently asked what was available that shows JFK and top
 >level officials _knew_ that soviet equipment was being put into
 >Cuba. (in connection with Corso book) I mentioned that people
 >knew about this long before October 15, 1962.

 >If interested I suggest that you go to this web link:

 >http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/03-01.gif

 >Of additional interest see the classification of the document,
 >i.e. Top Secret & Sensitive.

 >There are many other documents around, especially just after the
 >infamous Bay of Pigs fiasco in which people were alleging that
 >soviet equipment and troops were being dumped into Cuba.


Robert,

You keep saying the same thing Robert, and the only answer is to
repeat....

No one is saying the top brass didn't know equipment was being
moved into Cuba. It wasn't the fact that JFK, CIA or the
military didn't _know_, you have shown that, over and over
again, that they did! I believe you Robert and agree. What has
been said by Ed and myself is that the administration _chose_
(at that time), to ignore it, as JFK didn't want a confrontation
with the Russians at this point in his term

It wasn't untill Corso was _secretly_ leaked the photographs
(not that he was the only one that knew) of the Nuclear
cannisters, that forced his (JFKs) hand. Now I'm not saying that
JFK would have _continued_ to ignore the nukes, only that Corso
forced the issue before Kennedys' admin did._anything_  to
address them.


Cheers

William













   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:33:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:52:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 10:07:48 -0500

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

<snip>

 >>Quintanilla didn't even call Zamora a hoaxer, though he probably
 >>would have liked to. But we weren't talking about past AF
 >>history, until you brought it up (thereby acting as if I was an
 >>apologist for everything they've done or haven't done regarding
 >>UFOs, when I was addressing a specific instance, and a specific
 >>instance only. Sorry, but that brush won't tar.)

 >Lt. Col. Q certainly implied it after he retired, as you should
 >know from the excerpt from his memoir you published in The
 >Anomalist. One person who openly accused Zamora of hoaxing was
 >the Big Pelican himself, Phil Klass. I don't recall Zamora's
 >threatening to sue him. Come to think of it, I don't recall that
 >-- though the BP has accused any number of UFO reporters of
 >hoaxing -- Klass has been sued by anybody. I don't recall that
 >anybody ever sued Blue Book after being called a hoaxer. So on
 >what in the world do you base your strange claim that the AF
 >feared lawsuits if it called Roswell claimants liars? Or did you
 >just make that up?


Jerry,

Uh, these are more litigious times, in case you hadn't noticed.
The point was: why invite a _potential_ lawsuit if you don't
have to? The fact that Zamora didn't sue Klass ends there. It
has nothing to do with whether or not Glenn Dennis (or others)
_might_ have sued the AF had they so desired. You should do a
stint in PR, and its subsequent legal liabilities, sometime
yourself. Theoretically, the AF had access to legal counsel,
which advized them as to what they could or could not say,
and/or as to how they could word same. Nothing more sinister
than avoidance implied or intended.

But since you like Zamora, here's another quote re same for you:

"Maj. Hector Quintanilla, Jr., Project Blue Book Director, took
a special interest in the case. He was convinced that Zamora had
told the truth about what he had seen, and that it was not a
hoax. Writing in Studies in Intelligence.

In 1967, Quintanilla summarized the sighting:

'Diagnosis: Unsolved. There is no doubt that Lonnie Zamora saw
an object which left quite an impression on him. There is also
no question about Zamora's reliability. He is a serious police
officer, a pillar of his church, and a man well versed in
recognizing air-borne vehicles in his area. He is puzzled by
what he saw, and frankly, so are we.'" And so on.

Nothing to sue about there.

And where did I stumble across this? On page 272 of Bruce
Maccabee's UFO FBI Connection: The Secret [sic] History of the
Government's Cover-Up.

What did we publish in The Anomalist? An excerpt from
Quintanilla's previously _unpublished_ manuscript regarding his
experiences as head of Blue Book. And what does he say there?
That the answer is essentially in Zamora's head. That could
imply hoax, misidentification, or any number of things.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                        Re: Talk And Action - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 21:39:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:54:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Sparks


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Randle


 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500


 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:12:13 -0500

 >>>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:56:54 -0500

 >Dennis, Jerry, List -

 >If I might throw in my two cents here...

 ><snip>

 >>>What makes the AF's approach intellectually dishonest even by
 >>>its ordinarily dismal standards is its cynical use of suspect -
 >>>or actively debunked (by ufologists, of course) - testimony to
 >>>advance an absurd theory about the bodies at Roswell. Say this
 >>>for the Air Force - nobody will ever match it in cynicism.

 >>And no one will ever match you for your reading of the AF
 >>report... What is cynical about not calling people liars, which
 >>would have only invited lawsuits? Did you think the AF was
 >>stoopid, too?

 >>But, wait a minute, you say ufology has debunked these accounts
 >>of bodies (after being the first to promote them). So, what is
 >>it, exactly, that the Air Force is guilty of in _this_ report -
 >>not admitting that they actually have bodies?

 >The Air Force is guilty here of not actually investigating
 >anything. They were attempting to refute the idea that something
 >of an ET nature had crashed at Roswell. Their first report is
 >filled with selective use of the data. For example, McAndrew
 >suggests, through Sheridan Cavitt, that there were no guards
 >around the crash sites and that no one was sworn to secrecy. Yet
 >the Air Force (McAndrew) knew that there were witnesses who did
 >say this and McAndrew knew who they were. Edwin Easley's
 >statement about being swore to secrecy is conspicuously absent
 >from that report, yet McAndrew knew it existed, and had he
 >asked, I would have sent him a copy of the tape. He had the
 >transcript.

 >When we move on to the second report, they still ignore what
 >Easley said, as well as other high ranking Air Force officers.
 >Instead, McAndrew focuses on testimony of Dennis and Ragsdale,
 >which I had told him was now considered to be bogus. They could
 >have it both ways because they knew that many of us would not
 >protest the "destruction" of these two testimonies because we
 >were the ones to reveal why they were now unacceptable.

 >The Air Force invented an answer that is ridiculous on the
 >surface. As Phil Klass suggested, they would have been better
 >off ignoring what a bunch of UFO nuts had to say because their
 >investigation suggested some validity to reports.

 ><snip>

 >>There you go again: AF & UFOs equal dishonesty and cynicism and
 >>nothing but. You probably think they rammed the Chinese pilot,
 >>too.

 >I believe it was the Navy and the Chinese involved here, but I
 >understand the point.

 >>Simple question: do you think they currently have in their possession
 >>alien bodies from Roswell, given that ufologists have debunked so many
 >>alleged Roswell "witnesses" who claim that they do?

 >I'll answer this for myself and let Jerry answer it later. Yeah,
 >I do think the government is in possession of alien bodies and
 >alien technology, regardless of the tales told by some of the
 >Roswell "witnesses."

 >>If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
 >>say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
 >>Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
 >>Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
 >>Answer? They can't.

 >This is a question, or similar to a question, that I have asked
 >myself since the time of Condon. How could Condon, or the Air
 >Force, prove to me that UFOs are not extraterrestrial craft (as
 >if that was the pressing problem they faced)?

 >The answer is if the investigation was an honest one. It is
 >clear from the documented history that the Air Force Blue Book
 >and the Condon Committee had no real interest in answering the
 >question of visitation. In the case of the Air Force, they can
 >be forgiven because their real interest was in determining if
 >UFOs posed a threat to the security of the United States. Once
 >they had made that determination (that they posed no threat),
 >then the problem, for them, disappeared.


Hi Kevin,

I just want to cut in here on one point and recommend the rest
of your posting via the link below:

 >http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m28-015.shtml

Before I read your post I had posted a response coming to the
same conclusion: The issue is one of honesty, integrity and
public trust on the part of the Air Force.

But the point I wanted to make that differs is this: The
"national security" issue. It is simply undeniable that any
phenomenon that can disable 10 Minuteman nuclear ICBM's is a
threat to national security by any conceivable definition. That
is exactly what happened and happened repeatedly (with differing
numbers of missiles/warheads) in 1966-8. Many of the same bases
were revisited in 1975 by UFO's.

Any phenomenon that can put the President of the United States
on the verge of evacuating Washington -- as happened on Dec 6,
1950 -- is a threat to national security. You can nitpick the
details but in every case an unidentified aerial object was
involved.


Clear answers,

Brad Sparks









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                   Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 21:42:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 08:57:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Mortellaro


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:36:02 -0400

 >>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:33:30 +0200

 >>Once again, refering to my comments to Mr. Sandow (Re: 2001. A
 >>Space Odyssey - in Gray), the witness did not described big,
 >>black, slanted eyes; instead they looked like fetal eyes. But
 >>this is another story.


 >Luis,

 >It's fascinating to follow the various alien types described by
 >alleged witnesses. And obviously it's important to know exactly
 >when the standard gray description emerged. It's important, too,
 >to acknowledge that most early witnesses didn't describe
 >standard grays (though they agreed, most of the time, on small
 >humanoids).

 >But did you see my reply to your Travis Walton/2001 post? Walton
 >certainly didn't say his aliens had normal eyes. He didn't
 >describe big-eyed grays, but found the eyes of his aliens
 >striking, unusual, and even (if I remember his quote correctly)
 >frightening.


 >Greg Sandow

Hi Greg, All... Errol,

More than interesting! And the disparate descriptions of eyes
and types of being? The alleged Roswell alien eyes were not the
traditional huge almond shape either. Neither were the body
types the same as the Gray. In my experience, there were also 3
distinctly different types of being. As you know, in different
parts of the world, there are different types of alien entity
reported... among these, the Nordic types, Insectoid types,
Grays et al. Let us not forget the little robed types, similar
to the Star Wars critters which name escape my mind. Ewokes?

Which came first? Which came where? Which came when? are the
questions which need answering.

Even you skeptics who seek information; how many of you feel the
way of the shnorer? (Beggar)

As the story goes ...

A shnorer was teaching his son how to get by in the world, so he
told him, "Remember, my son, the world knows only two words,
'yes' and 'no.' Whenever you are asked, 'have you prayed yet?'
always say 'yes.' Whenever you are asked, 'have you eaten yet?'
always say 'no!' "

I pray all the time. I am always hungry. For knowledge, which is
power. And all I get is agida. In this business, the words,
"Seek and you shall find" should be changed to, "Seek and you
shall be fined."

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                  Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 03:25:13 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:51:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700

Ed,

Some of the points you are raising were dealt with over two
years ago on UFO UpDates. See for example:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m17-005.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m22-013.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m22-027.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/dec/m12-002.shtml

In that last post, I wrote:

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.
[END]


Belatedly following up on this, and revealed for the first time
publicly, the person who 'aged' that film was Philip Jarman. He
wrote to me:

Answer to your questions of authenticity:

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, even Kodak
couldn't tell. From the computer, the animated scratches and
bits were laid over the footage.

I do not know where Ray got the 'Alien Autopsy' footage made but
I do know he had it made and it is not authentic. Again, I
remember Ray arguing with Keith in the office and that he kicked
a chair and broke a toe in the process because Keith was
threatened to blow open the whole thing, this was a few years
back now.

Keith has told his story to the newspapers and has said to me
that it doesn't matter now what I say, I just can't believe that
Ray is still saying that his footage is authentic.

[...]

[END]


The story about Ray's toe faring second best in a confrontation
with office furniture was confirmed by Keith Bateman to Nick
Fielding, although not published in Nick's 'Mail on Sunday'
article - see:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/mail_os.htm

If I recall, Bateman said that Ray was in America when he heard
Bateman's company intended to release their own 'alien autopsy
film', which came to be known as the 'tent footage'. He flew
back to the UK, called at their office in a rage, kicked a table
or chair and painfully regretted his expression of annoyance.

Given that the 'tent footage' was evidently known to be a hoax
from day one - see the material contained in those above
references - you do have to ask why Ray _did_ subsequently
promote it, until the _real_ 'alien autopsy' film suddenly and
only later appeared.

You also have to ask why Bob Shell was told the 16mm film to
video transfer was undertaken by Rank in London and Graham
Birdsall and myself were able to prove otherwise, by speaking to
the Manager of their only department who would conceivably have
been responsible for such work. Rank were seriously not amused
by Ray's story.

Ray did tell me in confidence who undertook the separate 'film
to video' transfer which resulted in that video tape given to
Bateman and Price-Watts in the hope they could enhance apparent
'almost non-existent' images. Although I've consequently never
revealed who that alleged 'facilities house' were, I can say I
could find no trace of their existence anywhere, even in
contemporary London telephone directories.


Corso and Santilli are arguably the proverbial fine bedfellows
as a basis of unquestionably 'significant', published material
which claims to expose such an extensive 'ET cover up' that it
even pervades what science understands to be founded on
terrestrial, technological achievements.

That premise is, to say the least, exceedingly unlikely and in
search of the true facts, you might take stock of how many
obvious clues actually exist otherwise.

Ray never answered any number of questions about the Rank fiasco
or the apparently non-existent 'facilities house'.


At the time our 'alien autopsy' footage appeared, Ray's business
partner was Joshua (Joe) Toledano. His son, James, is known to
have been interested in 'UFOs' - confirmed on his web site - and
was apparently a close friend of John Lundberg, indeed they
worked for the same company...

John is of course a renowned crop circle artiste, accomplished
model maker and, some might knowledgeably [without revealing all
they are aware of] suggest, the foremost 'UFO' hoaxer of recent
years.

I wonder what artistically skilled crop circle creators do when
they tire of that environment and the satisfaction how some
people believe their creations came from 'outer space'.

It must eventually become boring; who knows what new challenges
and opportunities might arise.

A gullible, or perhaps we should say 'enthusiastic' audience
always awaits...

It's not my recognised fruitless intent to convince that Corso's
claims and the 'alien autopsy', per se, are both a grandiose
hoax, merely to 'tidy up' _some_ of the factual 'loose ends' I'm
aware of.

We can agree for sure that 'Corso' and the 'alien autopsy', etc.
will forever remain a foundation of ufology's popularised, or
mainstream [call it what you will], intrinsic beliefs.

The current popularised/mainstream beliefs are of course always
reflected in the latest 'UFO' magazines and this year's
conferences - the absolute essence of where 'ufology' now
stands.

Whether Grrrr... or Greer...

It's a democracy and the peoples' choice!


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                      Of Interest To Creative Listers?

From: Wendy Christensen <christensen@catlas.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:22:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:53:28 -0400
Subject: Of Interest To Creative Listers?


INSCRIPTIONS SCIENCE FICTION ROMANCE CONTEST

The first space tourist recently spent $20 million to take a
short trip to the International Space Station. In time, every
one will be able to jet into space for a quick vacation.

The New Scientist also ran a story in May about a group of
academics who are planning a way to generate interstellar
Internet access. The first message is expected to be sent to
Mars in 2003.

These two events are bound to have an effect on future summer
romances. Write a short story (less than 1,000 words), telling
us a futuristic, science fiction romance story, entirely
formatted in e-mail. Combine all of the e-mails into a single
story. Single space the e-mails, and place a double space
between paragraphs. Do not indent.

There is no fee to enter the Science Fiction Romance Contest
(http://www.inscriptionsmagazine.com/SciFi.html). Entries must
be written in English, however, the writer can live anywhere in
this world.

Paste your entry directly into the body of an e-mail and send to
Contest@inscriptionsmagazine.com with the subject heading
"Science Fiction Romance Contest." At the end of your e-mail,
include your real name, pen name (if applicable), mailing
address, e-mail address and word count. All entries must be
titled. Enter as often as you like.

Entries that do not follow these guidelines will be
disqualified. Each entry will be acknowledged, once received by
the Inscriptions staff.

PRIZES:

1st place -- $50 gift certificate from Amazon.Com (or cash
equivalent) and publication in Inscriptions

2nd place -- $20 gift certificate from Amazon.Com (or cash
equivalent) and publication in Inscriptions

3rd place -- $10 gift certificate from Amazon.Com (or cash
equivalent) and publication in Inscriptions

We only ask for one-time electronic rights to the winning entries.
Deadline for all entries is June 22, 2001. Winners will be announced
in the July 9th issue of Inscriptions.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 01:54:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:56:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>Also fingered by Sarbacher as being involved in briefings at
 >>Wright-Patterson was Dr. Eric Walker (President of Penn State
 >>University and former head of the Dept. of Electrical
 >>Engineering and Dean of Engineering and Architecture). Walker
 >>also served as Executive Secretary of the Research and
 >>Development Board from 1950 to 1952. The RDB was the brainchild
 >>of Bush to continue defense-related research and development and
 >>came into being. Lloyd Berkner, another alleged MJ-12 member was
 >>Bush's first Executive Secretary (also a member of the CIA's
 >>infamous Robertson Panel in 1953).

 >I seem to recall that Walker when interviewed in the 80's was
 >spouting all kinds of wild conspiracy theories and claims -
 >JFK?, Nazis ? I think it's in a Hesemann book.

 >>Another member of the RDB who independently named Bush, Berkner,
 >>von Neumann, and Walker as either probably or definitely
 >>involved was Dr. Fred Darwin, who was the RDB's Executive
 >>Director of the Guided Missile Committee from 1949 to 1954.
 >>William Steinman interviewed Walker by phone in 1987. According
 >>to Steinman's transcript of his phone conversation, Walker
 >>initially admitted to attending meetings of the RDB "concerning
 >>the military recovery of flying saucers and the bodies of
 >>occupants" around 1950. When Steinman brought up the subject of
 >>MJ-12, Steinman said Walker's reply was, "Yes, I know of MJ-12.
 >>I have known of them for 40 years."

 >That would be before Walker served on the RDB in 1950-2. We have
 >to rely on Steinman's memory and interpretations since there is
 >no transcript and Steinman may have read his own knowledge into
 >it.

 >(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
 >conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

Hello, Brad, David:

The obvious reading of Walker's comments, to me, was that he was
answering Steinman's questions very tongue in cheek.  At one
point he told him that he sure doesn't have any aliens in his
office at Penn State.  The so called clamming up seems to have
been after Walker realized that he was getting these calls from
somebody without a sense of humor who was quite serious about
his preposterous questions - a real saucer nut.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                   Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:15:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:58:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Young


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:13:23 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle

<snip>

 >There isn't much other evidence "aligned against Corso". You
 >keep recycling the same evidence. He lied about his rank and he
 >was a commander, not the commander.

 >Below is his service record:

<snip>

 >6. He was promoted to LTC in AUS on 30 July 53 and in USAR
 >21 May 1957.

Ed:

You agree, then, that there is no evidence that he was ever
promoted to full Colonel?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:37:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:00:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Young


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 16:36:28 -0500

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:52:43 -0000

<snip>

 >Science doesn't have to sit around monitoring the skies for
 >UFOs; the latter would be incidental to other observations,
 >which are now taking place in quantities that could only have
 >been imagined a decade or two ago.

Dennis, Dick:

This is a very important point. Why isn't there more
instrumented evidence of visitations, if they are taking place?
Even though Hynek discounted it, the old Prairie network
operated from more than ten years, and the Canadian counterpart
for at least 20, while the European Fireball Network has, in its
various forms, been photographing the sky since the 50s. Where
are the saucers? Hynek claimed these networks had flaws, but the
Prairie network was capable of imaging fourth magnitude moving
objects (about the visual sky limit for most suburban skies).
Where are the UFOs?

 >It's naive on your part to think that ridicule rules like some sort
 >of fail-safe security, or cover up, blanket. _Can_ it have an impact?
 >No doubt. Is it guaranteed to keep the "truth" -- whatever that is
 >-- covered up from everyone? No way.

This is a point also made in the March issue of Magonia, by the
way, in an editorial by John Harney. UFOs could no more be kept
secret than could volcanic eruptions or meteor showers. How
could the "Government" control a phenomena inititated by an
outside force - the ETs?

 >In fact, there is no particularly necessary reason that any such
 >acquired data would have to be associated with, or identified
 >as, UFOs in the sense that you and I are talking about them
 >here, ie, as potential ET craft. Where is that unwritten rule?
 >The ridicule factor could easily be averted by any scientist(s)
 >interested enough to give it serious thought. But I forget:
 >they're mostly sheared sheep.

Where are the instrumented records of visitations?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:42:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:01:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:44:02 -0400

 >>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:02:44 +0200

 >>Angela Thompson is the 17th person visited by the Grays inside
 >>Hopkins's house! And, what has he done, at least, to try to
 >>catch _them_ in the act? Absolutely nothing. What kind of
 >>investigator is he?

 >If it happened in your house, what would you do?

 >Serious question.

Greg, Luis, List:

At least try videotaping. The fact that Hopkins has apparently
tried _nothing_ suggests that he may suspect what the result
would be. Imagine what a book that would be, or what a movie.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                       Project 'SIGN' - Initial Report

From: Daniel Guenther <daniel_g@t-online.de>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:12:06 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:02:45 -0400
Subject: Project 'SIGN' - Initial Report


Project 'SIGN' - Initial Report

http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/janaug/janaugwpafb131.htm
-
http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/janaug/janaugwpafb174.htm

(I typed the list so you can find it here

http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/100.txt


Daniel G.

--
Just the Cases - UFO sightings database
http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/ufodb.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                     Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:53:58 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:05:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting - Randles


 >Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:31:29 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 11:11:40 +0100

 >>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:29:43 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Rogue River Sighting
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I believe it was the Luton witness referred to here who
 >cointacted me, probably back in 1980 when I was in England. HE
 >drew a picture of the object for me... lots of detail. I can't
 >recall whether he was familiar with the Rogue River case before
 >or after I talked about it. But as I recall he was a child
 >playing with other children in a schoolyard when a large round
 >disc-like object hovered over them.


Hi,

Yes, this sounds like Bill Dillon - the witness in question. I
am not sure exactly when we came into contact but I think it was
pre l980 (and he certainly was unaware of Rogue River so it must
have been before he met ou  - at the BUFORA conference I
expect?)

Bill has been exceptionally thorough in providing details and
sketches of his Luton sighting at Ramridge School. There is a
sketch in FSR as referenced which those of you with copies
should check out and compare with Rogue River.

 >>My report on this was I think the last article that I wrote for
 >>FSR magazine titled 'In search of a UFO stereotype'. Its in
 >>Volume 28 No 4 (l983) - .

 >Investigators have been pursuing the "advanced unknown
 >airecraft" theory for years. This was one of the first
 >suggestions in 1947 (even by Kenneth Arnold). The FBI requested
 >a statement from the Air Force about the secret project
 >possibility and was told "No" by the general in charge of AF
 >research (in a letter by GEn. Schulgen).

I understand that but you only have to look at the Silverbug
photo and the sketches by witnesses to Rogue River and Ramridge
School to see how some of the small features that seem to make
these sightings stand out also appear on Silverbug. It could, of
course, be a coincidence, but Luton is an area where I would not
be surprised to find unusual aerial activity. Aerospace plants
were just to the south east, Luton airfield was very near
Ramridge and this whole area is only a few miles west of the
then extensive USAF bases in East Anglia.

Is there any evidence for Silverbug flights from the UK - maybe
connections with Hatfield - in the mid/late l950s?

 >At any rate, any such design would have been experimental and
 >experimental aircraft weren;'t flying over remote areas (a) where
 >they could be seen, (b) where there would be no help trouble if
 >there were an accident (crash).

Yes, I can see the logic of that regarding Rogue River  -
although it certainly doesnt apply to Luton, of course. I am
only noting the very close comparisons - and they are stunningly
close IMO - between Rogue River and Ramridge School. What this
means is anyones guess.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                    Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 29 May 2001 05:52:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:29:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Hamilton


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:36:02 -0400

 >>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:33:30 +0200

 >>Once again, refering to my comments to Mr. Sandow (Re: 2001. A
 >>Space Odyssey - in Gray), the witness did not described big,
 >>black, slanted eyes; instead they looked like fetal eyes. But
 >>this is another story.

 >Luis,

 >It's fascinating to follow the various alien types described by
 >alleged witnesses. And obviously it's important to know exactly
 >when the standard gray description emerged. It's important, too,
 >to acknowledge that most early witnesses didn't describe
 >standard grays (though they agreed, most of the time, on small
 >humanoids).

 >But did you see my reply to your Travis Walton/2001 post? Walton
 >certainly didn't say his aliens had normal eyes. He didn't
 >describe big-eyed grays, but found the eyes of his aliens
 >striking, unusual, and even (if I remember his quote correctly)
 >frightening.

Just jumping in here to also note that Walton described sking
that was white, not gray, a height close to 5 feet (a little
taller than most Grays), 5 digits on hands, and irises as big as
quarters.  His description is a departure from the typical Gray.

Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 09:09:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:33:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:33:33 -0500


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 10:07:48 -0500

Dennis,

 >>Lt. Col. Q certainly implied it after he retired, as you should
 >>know from the excerpt from his memoir you published in The
 >>Anomalist. One person who openly accused Zamora of hoaxing was
 >>the Big Pelican himself, Phil Klass. I don't recall Zamora's
 >>threatening to sue him. Come to think of it, I don't recall that
 >>-- though the BP has accused any number of UFO reporters of
 >>hoaxing - Klass has been sued by anybody. I don't recall that
 >>anybody ever sued Blue Book after being called a hoaxer. So on
 >>what in the world do you base your strange claim that the AF
 >>feared lawsuits if it called Roswell claimants liars? Or did you
 >>just make that up?

 >Uh, these are more litigious times, in case you hadn't noticed.
 >The point was: why invite a _potential_ lawsuit if you don't
 >have to? The fact that Zamora didn't sue Klass ends there. It
 >has nothing to do with whether or not Glenn Dennis (or others)
 >_might_ have sued the AF had they so desired. You should do a
 >stint in PR, and its subsequent legal liabilities, sometime
 >yourself. Theoretically, the AF had access to legal counsel,
 >which advized them as to what they could or could not say,
 >and/or as to how they could word same. Nothing more sinister
 >than avoidance implied or intended.

Frankly I'm surprised that you responded at all to my point,
which I see you haven't even touched. Let me repeat:

(1) No alleged witness accused of hoaxing a UFO sighting has
ever sued the U.S. government, much less successfully.

(2) You have not a shred of evidence that fear of being sued
figured into the Air Force's calculations when, drawing in good
part on testimony already discredited by ufologists, it conjured
up that absurd theory about crash- test dummies. (Which I take
it you find perfectly plausible. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.) Once again, you're just making it up.

 >But since you like Zamora, here's another quote re same for
 >you:

Yes, Dennis, please tell me something I already know.

 >"Maj. Hector Quintanilla, Jr., Project Blue Book Director, took
 >a special interest in the case. He was convinced that Zamora had
 >told the truth about what he had seen, and that it was not a
 >hoax. Writing in Studies in Intelligence.

 >In 1967, Quintanilla summarized the sighting:

 >'Diagnosis: Unsolved. There is no doubt that Lonnie Zamora saw
 >an object which left quite an impression on him. There is also
 >no question about Zamora's reliability. He is a serious police
 >officer, a pillar of his church, and a man well versed in
 >recognizing air-borne vehicles in his area. He is puzzled by
 >what he saw, and frankly, so are we.'" And so on.

 >Nothing to sue about there.

Wow. Talk about the ol' switcheroo.

Please tell me where I wrote that the AF officially judged the
Socorro CE2/CE3 a hoax. You can't, of course, because I didn't.
I said that the Big Pelican, Philip J. Klass, had openly accused
Zamora of hoaxing. I also noted that in his unpublished memoirs,
an excerpt from which appears in The Anomalist, the late Lt.
Col. Hector Quintanilla - now a civilian, not representing the
AF or Blue Book - intimated that Zamora had hoaxed his
encounter. Once again you've dragged out the straw man Brad
Sparks complains you habitually bring into the discussion.

 >And where did I stumble across this? On page 272 of Bruce
 >Maccabee's UFO FBI Connection: The Secret [sic] History of the
 >Government's Cover-Up.

 >What did we publish in The Anomalist? An excerpt from
 >Quintanilla's previously _unpublished_ manuscript regarding his
 >experiences as head of Blue Book.

Am I infer from your italicized "unpublished" that you ran
Quintanilla's excerpt without his permission? Or do you believe
that his words about Socorro and Zamora were, in some miraculous
manner, both published _and_ unpublished?

 >And what does he say there?
 >That the answer is essentially in Zamora's head. That could
 >imply hoax, misidentification, or any number of things.

It certainly doesn't imply misidentification, which
Quintanilla's Blue Book (as you've just reminded us) already
effectively ruled out as an explanation. And if Quintanilla
thought Zamora had hallucinated, he certainly would have said so
and, one should think, produced evidence to that effect.

What he was implying, obviously, was that only Zamora knows the
truth, which in context clearly suggests that only Zamora knows
for sure that he made up the story. The Anomalist excerpt also
makes clear just how bitter Q was about all the grief he'd
gotten from what he called "UFO buffs and hobby clubs" (e.g.,
James McDonald, APRO, NICAP - you know, the people who actually
conducted real investigations). It's not hard to speculate that
he must have gone to his grave despising Zamora for (in Q's
view, anyway) putting one over on him so successfully that Blue
Book could never prove it.

And finally, Dennis, maybe you could explain something to the
rest of us:

Why is it that you delight in trashing ufologists who use
suspect testimony to fashion unsupportable hypotheses when you
just can't bring yourself to criticize the AF for doing
precisely the same? Or is it your sincere conviction that
ufologists should be held to one standard and their critics to
another?


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:37:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:35:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:41:43 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Dennis, Bruce, List,

 >Scientific instruments in general are geared toward looking for
 >very specialized phenomena in very narrow windows of
 >observation. Military surveillance equipment and sensors _do_
 >look over a wide range and attempt to broadly cover large areas
 >or the entire globe. The output data are almost always highly
 >classified. Some incidents have leaked out so we know these
 >systems _are_ picking up UFO's, e.g., the DSP satellite tracking
 >on May 5, 1984, still highly classified and was baffling even to
 >Phil Klass (who could only suggest an SR-71 but it seems the
 >object was in deep space not the atmosphere), and the Defense
 >Meteorological Satellite photo of Oct 11, 1978 (see Bruce's
 >website for his exhaustive analysis).

<snip>

Brad,

All very good stuff!

By coincidence, there's an article in the Science Times section
of today's NY Times about the defense satellites picking up
incoming boulders from outer space. Happens more often than we
think.

It's on p. 2, I believe.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 11:30:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:38:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500


 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:30:08 -0000

<snip>

 >CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
 >self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
 >IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
 >travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
 >number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
 >it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
 >debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
 >lose.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry, Dick, List

 From the For What It's Worth Dept... By coincidence I just found
the below on a stock board on Raging Bull. Have no idea if it's
authentic or not, or what the original dateline is/was. But for
everyone's information...

Dennis



OT: STALKING LAWS EXTENDED TO CYBERSPACE..

by The Associated Press

OLYMPIA - A bill that criminalizes harassing or stalking a
person via e-mail or OTHER FORMS of computer communication was
signed into law yesterday by Gov. Gary Locke.

House Bill 1011, which passed unanimously in both the House and
Senate, does not create any new cyberspace laws. But it
clarifies that existing laws against harassment and stalking
include using communication by e-mail and the Internet.

"If phone calls, notes and regular mail can be frightening,
intimidating or threatening, e-mail certainly can be," said Rep.
Pat Scott, D-Everett, who first introduced the bill last
session, when it passed the House but did not receive a hearing
on the Senate floor.

The new law also authorizes people to obtain a protection order
if they are harassed or stalked by e-mail, repeatedly receiving
messages that alarm, annoy or are detrimental to them.

Under the new law, stalking and harassment by e-mail become
gross misdemeanors with a maximum penalty of one year in jail
and a $5,000 fine. Offenders who violate a no-contact order or
make death threats could be punished with up to five years in
prison and a $10,000 fine.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:00:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:43:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:21 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >And, Dennis, I would very much appreciate a response to my post.
 >You've been ignoring my previous responses. These take a lot of
 >time to research and write and I'm frankly getting quite tired
 >of the same old arguments getting rehashed and having to be
 >refuted with the same evidence and argument without any
 >resolution or even acknowledgment (here I'm referring to your
 >arguments on why science doesn't recognize UFOs as a legitimate
 >subject, which I've just refuted for about the 4th or 5th time).


Brad,

With all due respect, I wasn't aware, until now, that your
priorities and deadlines were somehow connected to my personal
priorities and deadlines, such as...moving. That's always a fun
one, isn't it? Try getting the house you're moving into finished
first.

On top of that, virtually any specific reference material that I
might want or need to access is packed away only God knows
where. That leaves me largely talking off the top of my
head...and we all know how much trouble that can get you into on
this List.

Yesterday, I briefly thought about tracking down the AF Report
on Roswell. I thought about it for about 30 seconds before I
realized it would probably take the entire day just to find the
damn thing, with no guarantee that it would be found at all.

As of this moment, I've got 4411 e-mails in my Inbox. Which one
or ones of yours would you like a response to? If it's more than
three or four months old, it's most likely gone on this end,
lost when the Navidad virus corrupted Eudora, denying me access
to all the e-mail therein. Windows locks up when you try to run
Eudora.

I'll get to it/them when I can. Sorry for the delay.

I think I can speak for just about about everyone on this List
when I say that your opinions and research are highly valued and
welcomed. They're indeed a true contribution to the UFO
literature and database. So, it's not exactly like your time has
been totally wasted on... me.


Sincerely,

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

             Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:35:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:46:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Velez


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500


Hi Alfred, hi All,

Alfred wrote:

 >I'd thought I was in America...

<snip>

 >In conclusion, how is it that an otherwise acceptable person in
 >this highly principled nation, a person loaded with quality
 >credentials (I add)... how can that person be denied the
 >opportunity to contribute something back to what that nation
 >says it so desperately needs - quality teachers? Is it
 >justifiable that an interest in UFOs and related material can be
 >so damning and ostracizing? Apparently so. And if that's true,
 >doesn't that say a lot more about my society, than about me?

My dear Alfred, you cannot expect "Flatlander's" (two
dimensional beings) to understand the "multi-dimensional"
universe that you live in. Their minds are almost incapable of
making the conceptual leap required to fully understand or
appreciate the world that you present to them.

Out of ignorance and fear of change they attack the messenger.
In short, you represent a very real _threat_ to them and their
"status quo." People like to think they have a pretty good
handle on things. That they are "in control." A lot of that
psychological 'comfort' is derived from their adherence to
little 'routines' of behavior, sets of rules, and the meeting of
other social requirements. They long for acceptance above all
else. For 'sameness.' For 'conformity.'

Then you come along and show them that there is another view,
(your "alien view") another way to operate and to perceive and
to 'be' in the world. Without realizing it you shake up the
underpinnings of their safe and accepted (and _known_) reality
system. For daring to insinuate that their world may be
illusory, that there may be a larger and deeper reality they
will rend you limb from limb. It's 2001 so they can only 'fire'
you. But believe me my friend, if it was only two or three
hundred years ago they would tie you to a stake and burn you
until you are dead. You are lucky to be born in a time where
such practices are considered unacceptable. Or surely you would
no longer be among us. You are anathema, a 'blasphemer' in their
eyes.

Your "blasphemy?"

You dare to tell the truth. You dare to reveal a Reality that is
almost diametrically opposite to the one they so desperately
cling to. You threaten to take away the comfort of their
imagined "control" and "grip" on the world. Why if they were to
open their minds to the kind of material/concepts that you offer
them, they would have to let go of all that they have held so
near and dear. They would have to deny the world view that they
inherited from their beloved parents (who would never lie to
them) and they would have to loose the white knuckled grip they
have on a set of beliefs that keeps them from being swallowed up
in the gaping maws of Chaos.

That's what you represent to them. Chaos! What they fail to see
(because they cannot) is the -FREEDOM- that is part and parcel
of what you offer them in exchange for their "illusory" comfort
and 'control.' They just aren't ready for you Alfred. You have
invaded their safe and known little universe like a virus that
threatens the very life of the world they cling to.

You're ahead of your time. You can choose to 'conform' to their
rules, play the game their way, go along and get along, or...
continue to be yourself and to do what you do. As long as you
are aware that there is a price to be paid, you should be
alright in the end. If you are unwilling or unable to pay that
price, then you should be playing the game by their rules if you
wish to continue operating within their 'system.'

You sign-off all of your e-mails reminding us what happened to
good old Bruno with the Fundamentalists. Geez, don't you see the
corollary between his case and yours?  <LOL>


Warmest regards, keep in there swinging!

John Velez  ;)


                      "Nothing is at last sacred but the
                          integrity of your own mind."
                            www.spacelab.net/~jvif/









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:02:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:34:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:35:30 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:14:22 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

I had previously posted:

 >>>The unknown object, of unknown size, and hence unknown distance,
 >>>was of course assumed to have passed over those in front. Hell,
 >>>it was 50 feet across, remember, and they chased it four more
 >>>than an hour and never caught up to it?

 >This is contextual distance determination: By passing over
 >objects of known size (police cars) at known distances (the
 >police cars) the size and distance to the unknown (the UFO)
 >becomes known

Brad:

Actually, this example involves an assumption: the distance
when the object was _assumed_ to have been overhead the
other police car.


Bob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 29

              Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 18:11:57 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:38:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free... - Hall


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500


Alfred,

A very sad story indeed. I come from a family of teachers and
instructors, as well as citizen soldiers, and have heard some
horror stories before (and personally declined teaching as an
occupation). You should submit this (or a modified form of it)
to your local newspaper, your Congressman, etc.


Dick



 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500

 >I'd thought I was in America...

 >Towards the end of 1992, and nearing the conclusion of a very
 >highly decorated twenty-three year military career (where I
 >unflinchingly served the best ideals of our country), I
 >thoughtfully surveyed my contemporaries and superiors for ideas
 >regarding a satisfying and worthwhile contribution I could
 >continue to make subsequent to my impending retirement. The
 >response was virtually universal. Teaching, they all said --
 >almost to a man and woman. Teaching was what I needed to do.

 >Clearly an extension of my successful previous occupation, I saw
 >the wisdom (and the honor) in the advice. Upon my retirement, I
 >immediately returned to college to secure a teaching credential
 >in an area where I determined the greatest need. I attacked that
 >academic objective as I would have any military objective --
 >diligently, intelligently, and imaginatively. I subsequently
 >graduated with that degree in education while receiving the
 >highest honors.

 >I applied myself strenuously to what I must describe as an
 >extremely enlightening edification rich in the history of
 >western civilization, certainly, as it pertains to the treatment
 >of the *least* of us by the *rest* of us, not to put too fine a
 >point on it. So, my considered specialty was the education of
 >the special needs person from preschool through high school and
 >beyond. The dismissing unwashed and dismayingly uninformed label
 >my very thoughtfully chosen career track as "special education."

 >As I said, I applied myself to the task. In the entire process I
 >received only one (decidedly humbling) "B". Along with this
 >exceptionally high grade point average I can easily say that I
 >had the respect and appreciation of ALL of my instructors and
 >professors, took full advantage of the academic college
 >experience, and derived a virtual Master's worth of value from
 >my bachelor of science degree. I reached, sir or madam, and it
 >changed me. My horizons got a LOT wider than I would have
 >predicted. Humorously -- I understand why it's the students and
 >teachers who always seem to start the social riot of revolution
 >. . . so please FORGIVE my intensity and passion regarding this
 >matter. I am, after all, the party injured.

 >Most would argue that I was a shoe-in for a quick position as a
 >school teacher. Indeed, I was reminded frequently all through
 >college by a cadre of counselors and observing teachers that I
 >was a "desperately needed minority" in a teaching field
 >experiencing an "extreme and continuing lack of qualified
 >personnel." ALL the published figures of their critical analysis
 >pointed to a "wide open opportunity" for a serious and sincere
 >person to involve himself devotedly in a quality public
 >education's service. ...No one seemed interested in recruiting
 >me, however. I found that admittedly unsettling, but
 >rationalizing it away, I pressed on. I should have seen the
 >handwriting on the wall.

 >Predictably, upon my eventual graduation (magna) there were,
 >essentially, no takers. I took the obligatory resume and
 >references around to the different school systems, and I entered
 >the local data base; I was treated, generally, like the
 >advantage taking carpetbagger or scalawag (for the exact same
 >reasons, I believe, upon educated reflection). I didn't get so
 >much interest (hardly) as a call in for a cursory interview. My
 >single substantive parlay (over an hour's drive away) resulted
 >in a six page letter of resignation for ethical concerns
 >associated with that system (not my own), and is available to
 >the interested upon request. I deeply resent my provoked regret
 >for THAT whole affair, but I digress.

 >Finally -- I secured a position at two related schools as a
 >'substitute' teacher. The children were pre-school through the
 >sixth grade (including, of course, the special needs kids), and
 >I was at least having much of the JOY of teaching if NOT the day
 >to day responsibility for it. I was in the second year of the
 >experience, and it seemed to be going nicely. I was getting
 >along well with (near all of) my fellow teachers and all of my
 >academic superiors. I was getting frequent accolades and
 >expressions of appreciation on my attitude and initiative from
 >parents and teachers . . . when, by special delivery mail one
 >Saturday morning after a week of inexplicable (to me)
 >inactivity, I was abruptly FIRED.

 >I was astonished. The admittedly questionable events of the
 >preceding weeks did not prepare me for this eventuality at all.
 >I was completely blindsided.

 >I won't say I didn't bring it on myself, sir or madam, but at
 >fifty-one years, and while realizing fully that I was starting
 >(and staying) at the bottom in a new career track, I still have
 >an aversion to someone pouring water on my leg and telling me
 >it's raining. I'm also keenly interested in UFOs, but why should
 >that matter to anyone? Justified written expressions of my
 >provoked irritation with an arbitrary system and autocratic
 >individuals include record memos of calm rationality regarding
 >immature behaviors on the part of persons trying to deal
 >autocratically with me, or running over me, or just treating me
 >with less respect than I would be expected to treat them. These
 >papers are also available upon request. As an aside, everyone
 >deserves SOME kind of due process, especially those with no
 >other protection, shelter, or recourse. A substitute teacher in
 >ANY school system is in the preceding category.

 >Honestly, as a seasoned and trained human relations counselor in
 >my own right (involved at all levels in the process of an
 >efficacious transition of psychological adolescents into
 >competent women and men, individually cooperating in efficient
 >teams) I had a reasonable and experiential basis to work from
 >regarding the utility of ethical treatment and the rewards of
 >fair play. I'm not a mean spirited person and I'm not spoiling
 >for a fight, but you'll hear me if you step on me. I'm not shy.
 >It's the American way.

 >At issue? Recently I had the opportunity to substitute in one
 >class of the fourth grade for six continuous days. I thought it
 >went extremely well. This resulted in a reported (though
 >completely unsubstantiated) "FLOOD" of complaints, following the
 >experience, allegedly from members of the "school board", fellow
 >"teachers", and concerned "parents." The bone of contention --
 >the highlight of all these converging torches and pitchforks,
 >was my public WEB site, a site devoted to UFO's and critical
 >social commentary. I suspect, rather, common high school
 >clique-ishness of the piqued arbitrary as a more likely culprit
 >-- a memo also on request, but that's another digression.

 >As regards the offending WEB site . . . I am proudly unashamed
 >of my WEB site, which is academically "G" rated, and contains NO
 >references to gratuitous sex, violence, or drug use. I KNEW kids
 >could go there (indeed, been GOING there for over a year)! There
 >is NO need for parental concern -- no need for a nanny filter.
 >There is NOTHING on my site that they cannot see on main stream
 >Saturday morning TV, TDC, TLC, THC, PBS, and A&E , or ANY
 >middle-of-the-road coffee table magazine. Moreover, while my WEB
 >site is, in a literary sense, WAY over the head of the gifted
 >fourth or even sixth grader, it is STILL a splendid display for
 >original and inspiring art works IN NO WAY suggestive or
 >prurient, and a GREAT example of what can be done with the most
 >original and freedom producing medium since the invention of the
 >printing press! My site is an academic SHOWCASE (I not so humbly
 >submit!) used in the exact same fashion as it was used the
 >ENTIRE last year without complaint from the referenced parents,
 >teachers, and school board members. Astonishingly, I'd bet my
 >site can be found on some of those classroom computers, still.

 >That was the thrust of ANY mention of my site, AT ALL, was that
 >it was topical, by the lesson plan, and in accordance with valid
 >discussion on the uses of computers in everyday life --
 >something the student could do, create on his or her own . . .
 >for FREE! I'm not directing the children to my site, so much --
 >rather providing tangible demonstrations for what THEY can do
 >themselves with a technology that is bearing down on them like a
 >proverbial freight train!

 >Additionally, as convenient enhancement for a teacher's referent
 >quality, it was helpful to inform them that I was an "award
 >winning artist" and a "prominately published" author able to
 >better encourage their appreciation for their own hard work...
 >when they were complaining about their Art curriculum being too
 >academically heavy this year, or what a chore critical reading
 >and writing were, for instance. I was able to demonstrate how
 >knowledge of the scope of computer generated art, for example --
 >depth of field, the effects of light and shadow, vertical
 >position in the field et al, provided them with a new and more
 >efficiently productive way to look at their evolving and
 >accelerating world.

 >Expanding a young persons horizons, encouraging a self kindling
 >desire to immerse themselves in the writing/reading process and
 >providing them with an interesting demonstration that counts in
 >the real world -- written and oral communication plus good, real
 >world and immediate reasons to get INTERESTED in these things?
 >That's what they allegedly go to school for . . . isn't it? I
 >worked hard to make it as interesting as I could. I tried to
 >sweep the individual child up in a self generating interest.
 >That's my thrust! The mere vehicle for encouragement of student
 >interest is my rational interest in anomalous aerial phenomena
 >and exobiology. My WEB site is NOT "inappropriate" for the
 >purpose of encouraging student interest. I bitterly resent any
 >suggestion that it is.

 >The clincher? Out of clear deference to mom and dad, I cautioned
 >the kids to check with their parents BEFORE logging on for an
 >unsupervised look. I did this VERY strenuously; I always do. I
 >am very responsible about that, forgetting for a moment that
 >there is no need to be concerned.

 >I am certainly more than willing and abundantly able to
 >rationally debate the courageous parent, teacher, or school
 >board member who has questions regarding the validity or the
 >appropriateness of the massive original contents on my site,
 >contents which would fill several books electronically published
 >in world class venues. This is forgetting for a moment that had
 >I been directed to stop using it as an example to students, I
 >certainly WOULD have -- while continuing my rational defense of
 >it to satisfy a simple sense of honor (or wounded pride). I'm
 >PROUD of what I do, what I have done -- what I create. No HIDDEN
 >agendas exist to subvert or corrupt. I stand by the true context
 >of all that I have painted or written. I've got good support for
 >learned convictions -- acquired in college and life's
 >experience, I stand by them. Lastly, I'm reasonable. I can be
 >shown an error. I can change.

 >But -- I'm for living and teaching, sir or madam, in a world
 >that is a marketplace of ideas and a realm of ever increasing
 >horizons and possibilities. The arbitrary autocratic was exposed
 >and made useless by the first world war, supposedly, and in the
 >twenty-first century it is the efficaciously strong-willed
 >individual who contributes to a stronger social web or
 >infrastructure! That's what I'm about, frankly -- teaching a
 >young person how to be a good leader in the twenty-first
 >century, or how to intelligently FOLLOW the good leaders that
 >they will. I aspire to the authoritative and eschew the
 >authoritarian. I have a lot of successful experience with that.
 >I'm good at it. I have hundreds of anonymous testimonials.
 >Perhaps some of the other teachers are content to teach good
 >"employees". I am not. I teach effective leaders, and as
 >everyone cannot be the leader, I correspondingly teach
 >intelligently critical followers.

 >To be so abruptly and decisively terminated (without clear
 >warning of any kind), and my career in education, as a result,
 >in sincere jeopardy (all but destroyed) is a source of _extreme_
 >disappointment to me.

 >I am exactly what the education system asked for. I have the
 >attendant respect for the process (demand it in fact), an
 >appreciation of the consequences for actions taken, and a desire
 >to promote and encourage a level playing field. I celebrate the
 >intelligence, capability, and imagination of an otherwise
 >maligned diversity, and I know the definition of a bigot. I'd be
 >an effective teacher, sir or madam; I've BEEN an effective
 >teacher for the better part of two decades.

 >I teach respect for all people in a manner that will transfer,
 >and my classrooms were a model of civility and purpose when I
 >officiated in them. The children were at attentive dress right
 >dress and at appropriate parade rest in all cases. I NEVER
 >remotely lost control of a classroom. Ironically, the only
 >comments from my superiors regarding the "appropriateness of my
 >classroom management techniques" were ONLY positive comments. I
 >didn't send kids to the office. I very seldom needed to.

 >Paradoxically, I report that I have received unsolicited offers
 >for excellent written recommendations from the Principal of the
 >one and the Vice Principal of the other schools as a testament
 >to the abrupt divergence I have very suspiciously generated. As
 >regards the job, I came early and I stayed late. I did much more
 >than was required for the very minimum wage. I aspired only to
 >be the model substitute teacher, to earn appreciation, and
 >achieve that very illusive idiosyncratic credit for more
 >responsible full time use within the system. It was not to be.

 >Frankly, I think my non-discretional maltreatment in this matter
 >was egregiously autocratic and arbitrary, a violation of moral
 >due process, and the very possible waste of six years of my
 >time. Indeed -- knowing what I know now (I could write a book,
 >and perhaps will) I would probably have involved myself in some
 >other kind of career field. As it happens, how can I be expected
 >to react upon blowing up in the minefield of a so capriciously
 >arbitrary an education *system*, anyhow? Feeling I've been
 >wronged, I speak out. I must. Anything else is an inelegant
 >agreement with the specious reasons posited for my abrupt
 >release and encouragement for similar autocratic and arbitrary
 >treatments to be suffered by persons that come after me.

 >Finally, I must ask myself how it is possible that a seasoned,
 >well traveled, highly and appropriately educated person cannot
 >break into a career field that, by ALL accounts, no one else
 >wants? How can this BE when I have satisfied every requirement,
 >touched every base, and filled every hole?  I suggest, perhaps
 >not so humbly, that I am merely standing outside the inequitable
 >arbitrary . . . and the problem is NOT mine. It can't honestly
 >be about UFOs, can it?

 >So why don't I teach? Apparently, I'm not to be allowed. Am I
 >that bad, far off the beam -- that much of a psychological
 >threat to children? I don't think so, people who know me
 >(recommended me for the job) don't think so. My guess is that if
 >we sat down over a coffee, you wouldn't think so, either. So
 >what's the real problem? If people can't be interested in the
 >peculiar occurrences happening around them (occurrences
 >otherwise shoved teasingly in their faces by a ubiquitous
 >corporate media) -- what's the point? Quality life is the
 >INDULGENCE of ones (law abiding) curiosity. Moreover --
 >curiosity NEVER killed the cat! That's another lie. It only kept
 >the cat FED!

 >In conclusion, how is it that an otherwise acceptable person in
 >this highly principled nation, a person loaded with quality
 >credentials (I add)... how can that person be denied the
 >opportunity to contribute something back to what that nation
 >says it so desperately needs -- quality teachers? Is it
 >justifiable that an interest in UFOs and related material can be
 >so damning and ostracizing? Apparently so. And if that's true,
 >doesn't that say a lot more about my society, than about 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                          Secrecy News -- 05/29/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:56:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:13:05 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/29/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 29, 2001

**US BLOCKS BOOK ON CHINA NUKES
**COX ON WU
**GUP ON GERTH


US BLOCKS BOOK ON CHINA NUKES

The continuing suppression of a book about the Chinese nuclear
weapons program written by retired Los Alamos scientist Danny
Stillman is examined in an Associated Press story today by
Richard Benke. See:

http://www.abqjournal.com/news/346261news05-29-01.htm

Rep. Curt Weldon cited the unpublished Stillman manuscript once
again last week in support of his claim that the Chinese nuclear
weapons program advanced due to the Clinton Administration's
relaxation of export controls on supercomputers in 1996.

"If China had not acquired those high performance computers,
they would not be where they are in developing their nuclear
technology, in miniaturizing their nuclear capabilities,"
according to Weldon. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/h052101.html

But Harold Agnew, former director of Los Alamos National
Laboratory, told the Associated Press that China "absolutely"
could have miniaturized its nuclear weapons without the use of
supercomputers. After all, he said, "we did."

Rep. Weldon has previously made unfounded accusations on a
number of occasions. In 1999, he falsely alleged that former
Energy Secretary "Hazel O'Leary leaked the plans for the W-87
nuclear warhead." Though proven false, Rep. Weldon repeated
this charge several times and never retracted it.


COX ON WU

Rep. Christopher Cox wrote to the Department of Energy last week
to protest the treatment of Rep. David Wu, a member of Congress
of Chinese descent who was detained by DOE security guards upon
entering DOE headquarters for a meeting and asked if he was
American.

The letter might have been unexpected because Rep. Cox chaired
the 1999 Committee on Chinese espionage that has been viewed by
many critics as exaggerating the threat posed by China. The
report of the Cox Committee, perhaps more than any other single
factor, led to a tightening of security measures throughout the
Department of Energy complex, from restrictions on foreign
visitors to increased polygraph testing to the general climate
of suspicion towards Asian Americans such as Congressman Wu.

But in a remarkably discerning observation on security policy of
the kind rarely heard from congressional Republicans or from Cox
himself, Rep. Cox wrote that "The petty bureaucratic imposition
of senseless and often offensive 'security' measures in
circumstances such as these actually undermines support for
genuine national security protections."

The text of Rep. Cox's May 25 letter, first reported by Vernon
Loeb in the Washington Post today, is available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/05/cox052601.html

Last year, Reps. Cox and Wu jointly sponsored legislation to
raise caps on visas for skilled technology workers.


GUP ON GERTH

The New York Times investigative journalist Jeff Gerth is the
subject of a long and interesting profile by fellow
investigative journalist and author Ted Gup in the current
Columbia Journalism Review.

Mr. Gerth played a leading role in the development of
controversial news stories such as the Whitewater scandal that
turned out not to be much of a scandal and (with James Risen)
the Wen Ho Lee espionage case that turned out not to be much of
an espionage case.

On Wen Ho Lee, Gerth and his Times colleagues continue to put up
a brave face, maintaining that they merely "reported" what
officials said, and did so accurately. The Times has never
explicitly acknowledged that it was in effect a protagonist in
the case, advancing a particular version of events and a
particular set of official interests.

Gup posed this question to Times managing editor Bill Keller:
"If I were a best friend or a trusted Times colleague, would you
give me a different assessment of the Wen Ho Lee story?" Keller
replied significantly: "You are not a close friend or trusted
colleague."

See "Eye of the Storm" by Ted Gup in the May/June Columbia
Journalism Review:

http://www.cjr.org/year/01/3/gup.asp

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

Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org>
with this command in the body of the message: subscribe
secrecy_news [your email address]

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
Email: saftergood@igc.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                 Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:23:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:23:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500

 >I'd thought I was in America...

<Most respectfully snipped>

Dear All, Al and Errol;

On behalf of those in the Land of the Fee and Home of the Knave,
I thank you Errol Bruce-Knapp, for publishing this piece. Whilst
not speaking for Alfred (he speaks admirably for himself, in
that he is both blessed and talented), but purely for myself,
stuff like this goes on all the time here in Amerika. It happens
to many. They lose their jobs. They lose their credibility and
they lose a huge chunk of self respect, purely out of the
culpable stupidity and pig headed nastiness of the authorities.

Most recently, I was stripped of a goodly amount of power by
local authorities (law enforcement) as a result of my demand for
audio tapes and records regarding sightings of triangular
objects in Westchester County of NY State. As a result of my
consistent efforts in that regard, I, a decorated volunteer in
community service, lost the position I've held for more than
_thirty years_ ! And that position was purely _voluntary_.

The deal was, I drop certain information in my book and cease my
continued demand for certain tapes and records or lost the
above.

I lost it.

"Something is happening but you don't know what it is... do
  you, Mr. Jones?"

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 29

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:10:56 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:29:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Kevin wrote:

 >Yeah, I do think the government is in possession of alien
 >bodies and alien technology, regardless of the tales told
 >by some of the Roswell "witnesses."

To me, as we (Kevin and I) have discussed off-List the problem
is not so much about alien technology (imagine a CD in Roman
times, etc. etc.) but about alien biology.

If human biologists got even the minimal data about a truly
alien biology, I am sure something should have filtered down
into our present Biology courses. But I do not find any
indications, do you?


Luis R. Gonzlez








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:47:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:12:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:30:08 -0000


As Richard Hall fully realises, the concerns which were
_politely_ expressed relate to published statements that have no
connection with 'UFOs'.

I'm unable to comment further.

Any critical remarks borne of earnest beliefs in the Arnold or
Zamora cases and directly relating to case evidence, wouldn't
trouble me in the slightest.

It was, after all, Dr Jacqueline Mitton, media spokesperson and
Press Officer for the prestigious Royal Astronomical Society who
wrote, "your detailed research adds strong weight to the
interpretation of Arnold's sighting as birds" and expressed how
she would like to inform the British Association for the
Advancement of Science.

That's _the_ Royal Astronomical Society and _the_ British
Association for the Advancement of Science.

Dr Mitton, the Society's spokesperson for the past ten years, is
highly knowledgeable about the subject of 'UFOs' and has written
a children's book called 'Aliens' (Walker Books) which covers,
"UFOs, aliens in fiction, the possibility of life elsewhere in
space, and SETI".

A full length feature on that research and its startling
conclusions was scheduled to be published in The Times
newspaper. That's _the_ London Times. For reasons I won't go
into, it's currently 'pending' and will appear in due course.
This is amongst other ongoing publication developments which
will be announced in future.

It was a foremost 'debunker' and highly regarded writer within
the 'Skeptical community', who commented on my 'Fortean Times'
article, "Don't tell Phil Klass this, but I think that
'pelicans' sound MUCH more plausible to me than meteors. Keep up
the good work". Along with many other comments from those who
were not fanatical about Arnold's 'flying saucers', I've always
therefore been aware of the meaningful feedback and an accurate
perspective of my case research. The conclusions of course also
met with approval from Martin Kottmeyer.

It has occurred to me that Dr Mitton's favourable review is
possibly the only instance of a ufologist's research being
endorsed by such an august scientific body.


Subscribers to 'UFO Skeptics' will be aware of significant,
continuing developments in the Zamora case.

For some years now, a promising lead has been a magazine article
which Larry Robinson recalls reading and in a recent list
posting (copied here as UFO Skeptics is a public list), he
brought this story up to date:

I saw the article ONCE sometime in 1965 or 1966. At the time, I
had thought it was an amusing anecdote. I wrote a synopsis of
the text because I thought it was funny. I hadn't heard of the
Socorro case yet from any other source, and I had not yet become
interested in UFOs (1967)

Unfortunately, the magazine was borrowed, or the solution would
have been complete a long time ago. It was one of the following
kinds of magazines (which were what I normally read at the
time):

[...]

I recently found what I had written down, filed in my file on
funny real-life incidents... The file has been packed in a
moving box since 1993. I didn't even know my note still existed
until I found it.

[...]

Here is what I wrote down. It is NOT a verbatim copy of the
magazine account (teenagers tend to abbr.) excepting the quoted
parts:

A hot air balloon landed, a cop drove up, the pilots thought
they'd get jailed for trespassing. Then the cop started hiding
behind things. "Our balloon freaked him out." The pilots thought
he might shoot it out with them, so they beat it into the sky.
Later, we found out he thought he was seeing some sort of space
ship."

The quote marks are not present in what I originally wrote. I
added them here to show which parts were accurate. When I first
heard of the Socorro case, I thought of this article, but
dismissed it. I didn't know how noisy hot-air balloons are. I
had imagined that they would be quiet like a gas stove. That
changed in 1976 when I had my first close encounter with one.

[END]


Does this anecdote relate to Zamora's sighting?

We will find out shortly.

In a major breakthrough, I have been able to locate a source
which records every known article ever published about hot-air
balloons. During the time-frame Larry states and within two of
the magazines he recalls reading, there are indeed related
features.

I have simply ordered copies of all such material published
between 1963 and 1967 - a total of ten articles.

One way or another, their overall historical content should
fundamentally clarify the question of whether our Socorro UFO
was merely a hot-air balloon.

All will hopefully be revealed over the next few days.


Again though, whatever criticism has existed about ongoing
research published, the focus has never shifted from
considerable endeavours to uncover the factual evidence. That's
how those pivotal, original 'Rendlesham forest' witness
statements were discovered lying in FUFOR's archives and why I
was able to ensure they were made available to other
researchers.

I don't think either Jan Aldrich or Richard Hall have ever quite
forgiven me for that.


Anyway, this should all set some matters in their true context.

Having done so, this is my last contribution to 'UFO UpDates'  -
I will no longer receive UpDates mail either - as I need to
avoid inane distractions from actual research which is being so
productive.


James Easton.
E-mail: voyager@ufoworld.co.uk
www.ufoworld.co.uk

Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

http://debunk.listbot.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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                      Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:00:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:14:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 01:54:20 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Hi, Brad, David, Bob,

 >>That would be before Walker served on the RDB in 1950-2. We have
 >>to rely on Steinman's memory and interpretations since there is
 >>no transcript and Steinman may have read his own knowledge into
 >>it.

 >>(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
 >>conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

 >The obvious reading of Walker's comments, to me, was that he was
 >answering Steinman's questions very tongue in cheek. At one
 >point he told him that he sure doesn't have any aliens in his
 >office at Penn State. The so called clamming up seems to have
 >been after Walker realized that he was getting these calls from
 >somebody without a sense of humor who was quite serious about
 >his preposterous questions - a real saucer nut.

Not often that I agree with Bob, but I think he's on the money
here. My impression, too, was that Walker was speaking with
tongue buried in cheek, always a mistake when one is talking
with a humorless soul, of whom Steinman is practically a
definition of the species.

Steinman's book on Aztec, where Walker's alleged role is
discussed, is one of the most godawfully daffy UFO books ever
written, and that's saying something.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

               Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:09:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:16:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis - Sandow


 >From: Williams Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:00:51 +1200

 >No one is saying the top brass didn't know equipment was being
 >moved into Cuba. It wasn't the fact that JFK, CIA or the
 >military didn't _know_, you have shown that, over and over
 >again, that they did! I believe you Robert and agree. What has
 >been said by Ed and myself is that the administration _chose_
 >(at that time), to ignore it, as JFK didn't want a confrontation
 >with the Russians at this point in his term

 >It wasn't untill Corso was _secretly_ leaked the photographs
 >(not that he was the only one that knew) of the Nuclear
 >cannisters, that forced his (JFKs) hand. Now I'm not saying that
 >JFK would have _continued_ to ignore the nukes, only that Corso
 >forced the issue before Kennedys' admin did._anything_  to
 >address them.


And where - please tell me! - is the historical evidence for
what you're saying?

Just recently a thick history of the NSA was published, and
reviewed on the front page of the NY Times Book Review: "Body of
Secrets : Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency
from the Cold War Through the Dawn of a New Century," by James
Bamford.

In this book, there's a summary of the NSA's role in gathering
intelligence that helped show nuclear missiles were in Cuba. But
this summary goes beyond the NSA. It also talks about the CIA's
role, and in general about the intelligence-gathering process
that the JFK administration went through.

Nowhere in the book is there so much as one word about any
unwillingness to confront the missiles. Nowhere in the book is
there anything about leaks to the press forcing or even
influencing any action.

Instead, what the book documents is a steady gathering of
information, matched by a steady gathering of concern, and then
quick action once the missiles were confirmed. As far as I've
seen, this is the story told by every reputable historical
source.

Another useful source: "The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White
House During the Cuban Missile Crisis," edited by Ernest R. May
and Philip D. Zelikow

Where - in the works of serious historians - is there any
evidence that leaks to the press had any influence?


Greg Sandow








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                        Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:38:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:18:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500

<snip>

 >When I worked for Fate many years ago, James Oberg threatened to
 >sue over a critical article on UFO debunkers that David M.
 >Jacobs wrote in a book we put together (Proceedings of the First
 >International UFO Congress, Warner Books, 1980). Our publisher
 >was sufficiently scared that it canceled an intended second
 >printing of the book. Oberg had no case, but as we all know,
 >there is no "winning" in a slander suit by the time you've paid
 >off all the lawyers.

 >CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
 >self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
 >IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
 >travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
 >number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
 >it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
 >debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
 >lose.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry,

I don't want to make light of what is potentially a very serious
situation - which I abhor and object to - but aren't you
hammering me on another thread on this List for having the
temerity to suggest that the AF might have had potential
lawsuits lurking somewhere in the back of its thinking and
public wording?

Hmmm?

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso -

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:41:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:20:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction - Gonzlez Manso -


 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Sgt. Moody's Abduction
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 19:23:34 +0200

 >>But did you see my reply to your Travis Walton/2001 post?
 >>Walton certainly didn't say his aliens had normal eyes. He
 >>didn't describe big-eyed grays, but found the eyes of his
 >>aliens striking, unusual, and even (if I remember his quote
 >>correctly)frightening.

 >Yes, I saw it, but could not answer in time.

 >You are moving the goalposts. The shape and size of the alien's
 >eyes described by Walton is the same that those of the 2001
 >poster (without eyebrows and eyelashes, but with a white cornea
 >and a dark iris). A total different thing are the sensations and
 >feeling such eyes gave Travis (striking, unusual and
 >frightening).

"The same" is tricky language. The same according to who? Would
Walton look at the poster, and say the eyes he described were
"the same"?

And why would the eyes frighten him so much? What about them was
frightening? That's something else I'd want to know, before I
said the eyes were "the same" as those in the poster.

Seems to me we have a 50-50 situation here. Walton didn't
describe the eyes as many later abductees did, but on the other
hand the eyes had much the same on him as the all-black eyes had
on other abductees. (Note my language: "Much the same" seems
like a far safer way to talk, when we're talking about something
so unclear and subjective.) In your earlier post, you said
Walton described "normal" eyes. I'd think "normal" is hardly the
word to use for eyes that were so frightening.

 >Who was the first to describe a total black eye? I am looking...
 >Betty Andreasson... no, but I have just discovered (by
 >serendipity, how I love this word) a different tack.

As far as I know, all-black eyes were described by abductees in
the early '70s. Some of their cases haven't ben published, but
others would be in Budd's book "Missing Time." Note, though,
that the cases in that book can't be dated from the book's
publication date. They might have happened long before the book
was written.

Eddie Bullard would be the one to ask when all-black eyes first
surfaced in published accounts.


Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:44:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:21:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Rimmer


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500

<snipped>

 >When I worked for Fate many years ago, James Oberg threatened to
 >sue over a critical article on UFO debunkers that David M.
 >Jacobs wrote in a book we put together (Proceedings of the First
 >International UFO Congress, Warner Books, 1980). Our publisher
 >was sufficiently scared that it canceled an intended second
 >printing of the book. Oberg had no case, but as we all know,
 >there is no "winning" in a slander suit by the time you've paid
 >off all the lawyers.

 >CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
 >self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
 >IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
 >travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
 >number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
 >it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
 >debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
 >lose.

 >Jerry Clark

Why do I seem to hear the name "Stanton Friedman" echoing from
the hills of Derbyshire? (County in northern England, residence
of one Jenny Randles, for the uninitiated)


--
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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                          Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:19:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:23:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:06:06 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >I think we're talking about different things. What you said is
 >correct but not relevant to Project Blue Book which was _NOT_ a
 >TS/Codeword project, but which, according to the bogus EBD and
 >other MJ-12 hoax documents, was set up for the MJ-12 Committee
 >to funnel information to MJ-12 - which supposedly included
 >Menzel as a member. The fact that in reality Menzel could not
 >get files from Blue Book and was blocked by the very person
 >claimed in the EBD to be MJ-12's "liason" [sic] with Blue Book,
 >its chief Edward Ruppelt, is proof that the EBD is a fraud and
 >cannot be explained away by normal classification rules and
 >compartmentation procedures since according to EBD's scenario
 >Blue Book/Sign/Grudge was set up for the very purpose of
 >providing a cover or front for quietly channeling UFO data to
 >MJ-12.

<snip>

 >Again we're talking about different things. You're talking about
 >clearances in general. I'm talking about the alleged MJ-12
 >Committee having specific clearance for all governmental UFO
 >information and clearance for files from the Blue
 >Book-Sign-Grudge project specifically set up for MJ-12,
 >according to the EBD MJ-12 (hoax) document. Since MJ-12
 >supposedly controlled government UFO information and policy and
 >set up Sign-Grudge-Blue Book to channel UFO data to itself it
 >was "directly involved" to use your phrase.

<snip>

 >It _does_ give you instant "need-to-know" if you are designated
 >by the President as having the "need" to know all UFO
 >information in government hands, as the EBD and other MJ-12
 >documents claim about the MJ-12 Committee, i.e., that MJ-12 had
 >a "need" for as much UFO information as possible and that
 >Sign-Grudge-Blue Book were set up for that exact purpose of
 >supplying MJ-12 with all possible UFO data.

 >The better analogy is to suggest that Gen. Groves or Oppenheimer
 >could have been refused files by a "Manhattan Project"
 >contractor or laboratory. No way. If Menzel had been in such a
 >position of authority on the MJ-12 Committee which was allegedly
 >cleared to have all US Government UFO information then he could
 >not possibly have been refused such data by a 1st Lieutenant or
 >Captain in charge of a low-level low-security non-compartmented
 >project that had been specifically set up to provide his MJ-12
 >Committee with all possible UFO information.

 >The original argument was over whether Menzel could have been on
 >the MJ-12 Committee which purportedly controlled UFO information
 >and policy in the U.S. and then be denied access to BB files
 >especially if MJ-12 according to the (bogus) EBD of Nov 18,
 >1952, had "liason" [sic!! dumbbell misppelling] with the head of
 >BB just for the obvious reason stated in the Eisenhower Briefing
 >Document (p. 5):

 >"A need for as much additional information as possible about
 >these craft, their performance characteristics and their
 >purpose led to the undertaking known as U.S. Air Force Project
 >SIGN in December, 1947.... The operation is currently being
 >conducted under the code name BLUE BOOK, with liason [sic!!]
 >maintained through the Air Force officer who is head of the
 >project [Ruppelt]."

 >Clearly, the purported MJ-12 Committee member Menzel needed
 >"additional information" on UFO's and tried to get it from the
 >very project set up for MJ-12, Project BLUE BOOK, through the
 >very person designated as "liason" [sic] to MJ-12 for the
 >satisfaction of MJ-12's "need for as much additional information
 >as possible" on UFO's and that person (Ruppelt) denied MJ-12
 >Committee member Menzel access. This would be a violation of
 >BLUE BOOK's charter or very reason for existence under the
 >description given the MJ-12 EBD (if the MJ-12 scenario wasn't
 >fraudulent and a pack of lies).

<Much more equally relevant stuff snipped.>

Brad,

Huzzah, huzzah!

Now, we're just waiting for Stan's spin to see where you went
wrong!

For it was Stan who comfirmed the "fact" that Menzel was indeed
a charter member of MJ-12, and Stan who just can't let it go.

Not today and not tomorrow. Menzel and MJ-12 forever.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                     Re: Abductees' Books/Videotaping ET

From: Katharina Wilson <kwilson@alienjigsaw.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 18:24:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:26:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductees' Books/Videotaping ET


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:42:26 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators


 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:44:02 -0400

 >>>From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:02:44 +0200

 >>>Angela Thompson is the 17th person visited by the Grays inside
 >>>Hopkins's house! And, what has he done, at least, to try to
 >>>catch _them_ in the act? Absolutely nothing. What kind of
 >>>investigator is he?


 >>If it happened in your house, what would you do?

 >>Serious question.

 >Greg, Luis, List:

 >At least try videotaping. The fact that Hopkins has apparently
 >tried _nothing_ suggests that he may suspect what the result
 >would be. Imagine what a book that would be, or what a movie.


The following article is the result of a videotaping experiment
I did in order to try to find out what was going on with my own
abductions. I'm curious about your thoughts.

"The Alien Jigsaw" Contents

http://www.alienjigsaw.com/contents.html

"Videotaping Those Elusive Aliens"

http://www.alienjigsaw.com/videotap.html


Thanks all

K. Wilson









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                    Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 19:05:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:29:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 02:42:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>If it happened in your house, what would you do?

 >At least try videotaping. The fact that Hopkins has apparently
 >tried _nothing_ suggests that he may suspect what the result
 >would be. Imagine what a book that would be, or what a movie.


 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Abductee's Books & Investigators
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:58:57 +0200

 >I would try anything, from the most sophisticated video camara
 >to the simplest flour on the floor. Even the default data
 >(non-working videos, etc.) would be a progress, we could
 >document very precisely (and even discover how it was done)
 >those EM effects that many (myself included) doubt. I put this
 >challenge (trying to design a perfect alien trap) to Dan Wright,
 >but he was not interested. Maybe the Updates readers would like
 >to make a try?

I waited for Luis's answer, just to see if he'd come up with
anything that hasn't already been tried.

Maybe flour on the floor qualifies. But everything else
mentioned here has already been done. Dave Jacobs has at least
one case of someone who left video cameras on constantly, with
(he says) anomalous results. And in "Connections: Solving Our
Alien Abduction Mystery" by Beth Collings and Anna Jamerson,
there's an account of extensive electronic monitoring, again
with (the writers say) anomalous results. I've heard of other
cases, too, but don't have details.

Budd, of course, knows of the two cases I've mentioned (he
worked closely with Anna, and with Beth Collings). If he doesn't
monitor his own home, that may be, in part, because - no matter
what Bob Young thinks - he's satisfied, based on the experience
of others, that the result would be positive.

I might add that monitoring - especially extensive electronic
monitoring - is more easily talked about than done. I'm not
saying it shouldn't be done, or that I wouldn't jump up and
cheer if somebody mounted a full scientific investigation of
abductions, including the most extensive monitoring possible.

But Budd isn't a scientist; he's never claimed to do scientific
investigation; and in any case his attention is fully occupied
with the abductees themselves, not to mention a curious little
side project called making a living. That's an essential
preoccupation, I might add, since abduction research (or writing
books about abduction) certainly doesn't pay the bills. He'll
spend a lot of time mainting a nationwide list of therapists -
not abduction investigators, but orthodox therapists - who are
willing to counsel abductees. Maybe, given his own knowledge and
temperment, that's a better use of his time.

Please note that I said "a better use of _his_ time" (note the
stress), not a better use of the time of some ideal abduction
investigator. But in the real world, others may be able to
arrange monitoring more capably than Budd could, and it's even
possible that we may hear some welcome announcements about that,
some time in the future.

Maybe on a more personal note, since Budd is a friend, I'd ask
people - even skeptics - to work a little harder at
understanding things from his point of view before mounting such
disdainful criticism. Luis, for instance, said something to the
effect that he'd lose all respect for Budd if Budd didn't
monitor his own house. I wonder what Luis, or Bob, or anyone
else who's quick to criticize imagines an abduction
investigator's life is like. Among many other things, I wonder
if they've tried - as Budd has, on occasion - to try to find
someone with scientific credentials who will study some piece of
alleged abduction evidence, only to find that nobody will do
that and then allow his or her name to be attached to the
results.

Understand that I'm not saying - and have never said - that Budd
is perfect. He has his limitations. So do all of us, including
physical scientists, many of whom couldn't begin to do the
person-to-person abduction work that Budd has done. Nobody
(except, maybe, some abductees, who have a lot personally at
stake in all this) would be happier than I'd be, if a full
scientific effort were finally mounted. But people who imagine
that Budd should somehow function as the equivalent of a
well-equipped scientific laboratory are (at least in my view)
asking more than is humanly possible.


Greg Sandow










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                       Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

From: Kevin Randle KRandle993@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:35:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:32:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:13:23 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Randle


 >Kevin,

 >You wrote:

 >>The confusion exists because Corso said that he was promoted to
 >>full colonel in the reserve and the record shows that this
 >>statement is untrue. If Corso had said that he was a Lt. Col.,
 >>there would be no confusion.

 >I agree but I'm still confused and working on trying to settle
 >this one way or the other. His son stated that he thought all
 >officers were bumped up a rank upon retirement. Is that correct?
 >If so why wasn't Col. Corso? I'm not familiar with ranking
 >traditions but if I were you I wouldn't discount Corso's story
 >because of this confusion.

No, this is not true. Some officers, upon retirement are
promoted to the next higher grade, but this is an exception, not
the rule. Some, who had served in a higher grade, return to that
grade upon retirement. For example, there was a master sergeant
at Roswell in 1947 who, when he retired a few months later,
retired in the grade of brigadier general. He had held that
grade during the war, but had returned to his permanent grade
during the reduction in force after the war. By serving a few
months as a master sergeant he would be entitled to retire as a
general.

The only reason there is confusion is because Corso was not
truthful about this situation. This alone is not reason to
reject all that he said, but it certainly shouldn't inspire
confidence in the man. And I point out that I used this example
simply because it was one of the misrepresentations that could
be properly attributed to Corso and not to Birnes or someone
else.

<snip>

 >>Santilli had nothing to do with the tent footage.
 >>Of course he did. He was the one who provided it to a number of
 >>different TV producers. He was the one who suggested it was of
 >>the preliminary autopsy in a barn on the crash site and then,
 >>when Philip Mantle proved it to be a hoax, dropped it like a hot
 >>potato.

 >The story is clear that Ray had some damaged footage and asked
 >the hoaxers if they could get something from it. They sent him
 >the hoaxed footage instead. He had no inkling that this was
 >hoaxed and certainly no one told him it was hoaxed. The
 >cameraman didn't remember it so Ray began to have doubts. Then
 >Philip informed him and that was the end to it. Of course once
 >Ray knew it was faked, he dropped it. What would you have
 >expected him to do?

I would have expected him to have it properly tested, to have
the tale of the cameraman checked out, to be sure that what he
got back was what he had sent in. I wouldn't have expected him
to palm it off on TV producers and attempt to get paid for it. I
would have expected him to do his research rather than opening
the bidding.

 >>>>He changed the cameraman's statement
 >>>>after it was pointed out that it was not an American "voice,"

<snip>

 >Where did he change the cameraman's statement? He just explained
 >why there were mistakes.

Mistakes were made because those inventing it weren't aware of
the American terminology. When caught, they were forced to
change it to reflect American idiom. And those changes suggest
that the statement was invented by someone from Britain rather
than by someone in the United States. It suggests that something
deceitful was being done.

 >Do you think Ray made this up?

Yes, as a matter of fact. Or one of those working for him.

 >Have you
 >ever read much of what Ray has written? Ray wouldn't even have
 >the slightest idea of how to go about making up a story on
 >Roswell.

Which explains the many mistakes.

 >If he did why, didn't he do a better job and why was
 >the cameraman's version of events of so far off the mark from
 >the other Roswell testimony and research. If they were planning
 >a hoax and they wanted folks to believe it, why didn't the alien
 >have four fingers, at least. This is what I mean by drawing a
 >map. How do all these incongruous facts make any sense. How do
 >you put all this together. You must have some idea since you
 >hold such strong opinions. Ray did have rolls of 16mm film. It
 >was converted to video.

Because there was no pressure to get it right the first time.
When mistakes were pointed out, Ray rapidly corrected them so
that the next group wouldn't see them. This, to me, suggests
that he was not being honest, and that he had not done his
research. He was surprised by the information available about
the Roswell case and eventually had to change the story so that
it wasn't Roswell but a different crash some thirty days
earlier.

Ray told people there was footage of Truman walking the debris
field, of cranes lifting material onto trucks, or people in the
footage who could be identified. That is what he said, and none
of it is true. And yes, I know that he has excuses, but I don't
find those excuses to be adequate, and to me, they suggest hoax.

<snip>

 >>Okay, but you won't like the answer. The Fort Worth pictures
 >>show the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target and not
 >>pieces of a flying saucer. Any images seen in this wreckage are
 >>so many faces in the clouds.

 >The images are not 'faces in a cloud" and we can certainly prove
 >that if anyone would take a look at what Neil has produced. But
 >the "striking resemblance' I'm talking about is the debris
 >itself. Some of the components we've seen in the Ft Worth photos
 >are almost exactly the same debris as in the AA. The team has
 >looked at the Ft. Worth photos very closely and there is no
 >evidence that the material on the floor in Gen. Ramey's office
 >resembles a weather balloon.

You can see the blackened balloon envelop in the background. The
metallic debris is the remains of the rawin radar reflector and
not pieces of an alien spacecraft. And no, I do not believe the
latest tales told by J. Bond Johnson. He saw a balloon, was told
it was a balloon and went away happy fifty years ago. Now he
didn't see a balloon and wasn't told it was a balloon. His
testimony has changed in such a radical fashion that he has
rendered it useless.

 >>And, I find it difficult to believe that when looking at alien
 >>symbols, we would find an English word in them. One of the
 >>I-beams in the footage has the word video on it. What are the
 >>chances that a video tape of alien debris would contain the word
 >>video on it?

 >This is a complete fabrication. There isn't any "video" at all.
 >Where is your proof for this statement. Yes this has been said
 >before but when you look closely, there is no such word.

No, it's not. I saw it myself, in the version of the debris that
was circulated in 1995. The word appears on an I-beam, which
does not resemble that described by anyone. BTW, the symbols do
not match those drawn by either Jesse Marcel, Sr. or Jr. This
looks as if someone had read descriptions and let their
imagination run wild.

[snip]

 >But as it turns out, Greg's statement wasn't correct. Corso did
 >play a role in the Cuban Missile crisis and Paul Scott verified
 >this. If we could take the so-called "misrepresentations" one at
 >a time we might be better off. I concede that I'm at a loss over
 >the rank issue but I haven't seen much else that could qualify
 >Corso as a liar. There are mistakes, though, and I readily admit
 >to that.

No, I joined because you had said that there was no evidence
that Corso had lied and I supplied two instances in which his
statements are not reflected in the documentation available, and
in which his co-author could not be blamed because the words
came directly out of Corso's mouth. I said nothing about the
Cuban missile crisis.

 >>His version of the events in
 >>Roswell do not match the testimony of others and his tale of
 >>seeing the body at Ft. Riley makes no sense in the real world of
 >>security and secrecy.

 >No, it doesn't, but don't you think, if he were a liar, it
 >would. Yes this is improbable but you have no evidence that it
 >didn't happen.

More to the point, you have no proof that it did. He had to
drive the bodies into Ft. Riley because the record would
establish that he was there. So, he created this silly tale
about the truck convoy coming into the base and his bowling
buddy sergeant telling him where to look for the bodies. Then,
rather than reprimanding his subordinate for this horrible
breach of security, he compounds the crime by going to look for
himself. And, all the time, the convoy is left essentially
unguarded for those at Ft. Riley to rifle through the classified
materials. Nope. It just doesn't work that way.

Not to mention that the 509th Bomb Group had airplanes. They
didn't need to truck anything anywhere because they had
airplanes to use.

<snip>

 >Polygraphs are extremely reliable, accurate and consistent but
 >still are not allowed except when both prosecution and defense
 >agree. The VSA and the polygraph are used by many major
 >investigative agencies including the FBI and most local police
 >departments. If they use these tools to limit mistakes, then we
 >should ,too.

Yes, we've had numerous demonstrations about the reliability of
the polygraph from the FBI... how many spies who passed how many
polygraphs have now been outed by other means?

And, it all depends on which studies you read about the
reliability of the polygraph. Some suggest a 50-50 reliability
which is about equal with guessing and some as high as 90% which
still leaves a margin for error.

 >>>Should we reject all that Corso says simply because you and
 >>>others have called him a liar? He has passed a VSA on these
 >>>questions. Explain that before you start supposing this and
 >>>that. You all need to take another look at the Corso
 >>>information.

 >>No, I am suggesting that we reject Corso because many of the
 >>things he said were not proven in the documentation. The only
 >>conclusion to be drawn here is that Corso was not telling the
 >>truth.

 >There are many documents and histories that prove that Corso was
 >a major player but I agree that there is little to prove that he
 >seeded alien technology to the business community. What we
 >should be investigating is the chain of evidence that the
 >various companies have for the technologies they say they
 >invented.

Which has been done, repeatedly. Some of that information has
been supplied to this list. The transistor, for example, is
clearly traceable back to Bell Laboratories and predate the
introduction, by Corso, of that technology.

 >Corso said many things and most of them have not been discussed
 >or analyzed because of folks like you who insist that we
 >shouldn't take a closer look because it's all BS. You and Stan
 >and Greg and Richard, and Jerry and many others have effectively
 >shut down discussion because you're all so damn sure of
 >yourselves. Who's going to argue with you powerhouses, except
 >someone outside the UFO community like myself?

First, we haven't shut down discussion because we're wasting
more bandwidth on it. Second, when you get that collection of
people to agree on a point, wouldn't that suggest that maybe
there is a reason that all of us, from such diverse backgrounds,
with such diverse opinions and with such diverse levels of
education, that maybe we all have some insight into Corso? We
all can point to various areas of expertise and suggest that
Corso was making some very elementary mistakes. His story does
not hang together when it is examined by those of us who have
some knowledge on how such things should be accomplished. When
you begin to deviate so widely from established procedures, it
suggests that something is amiss.

I have never said that you shouldn't take a closer look at them.
But, take a look at everything, not just the small number of
things that tend to support your beliefs. Look all you want, but
remember that Corso's tale does not conform to the way the
military works, it does not conform to the story of the Roswell
crash, and he has been caught in a number of lies, including his
claim to have been associated with MJ-12.

<snip>

 >>>I wouldn't believe anything that Pflock says.

 >>So you'll just reject, out of hand, all of this evidence, even
 >>when Pflock can supply copies of the letters showing the chain
 >>of evidence? Pflock has the documentation, but more to the
 >>point, Thurmond's office demanded that new copies of the book,
 >>and the paperback be issued without the introduction. Sounds to
 >>me like the evidence supports Pflock's version and not the spin
 >>put on it by others.

 >Why would Birnes lie? Why would Simon&Schuster lie about this.
 >Besides Corso did work for Strom and anyone who knows anything
 >about him, knows that he does not suffer fools. He would never
 >have written what he did about Col. Corso if he didn't believe
 >it was true. I'll take a close look at Pflock's book but I'm
 >certainly skeptical of his claims. I think Strom's staff decided
 >to shield and distance him from the glare of this controversy.

In today's world it's called spin. More importantly, Thurmond's
office protested, and the introduction was removed. That should
tell you something about this and it also suggests something
about Corso's integrity. And if Simon and Schuster wasn't
worried, why remove that introduction from subsequent printings.

 >>>So how many digits did the Roswell alien have? What's you're
 >>>latest thinking on this?

 >>Certainly not six.

 >Well then, how many?

Five.

I want to take a moment to revisit the reason I jumped into this
arena. It was because it had been suggested that none of the
mistakes in Corso's book belonged to him, but were the result of
the enthusiasm of Birnes. The short fuse for publishing
(possibly to avoid the evil government from stopping it) didn't
provide Corso with the opportunity to read the manuscript after
Birnes had completed it, so we couldn't hold that against Corso.
I provided to instances in which the "mistakes" were clearly
those of Corso.

Now, let's revisit this idea that Corso didn't see the
manuscript prior to publication. I say, "Crap." Here's why, and
remember, I have published books with Simon and Schuster so I
know their procedures. There is a stage known as Copy Edited
Manuscript. This is the manuscript returned to the author(s)
with little yellow post-it type notes stuck on the pages with
questions from the copy editor. Birnes and Corso should have
seen this... I will say that Corso might have gotten a short
look or he might not have read the copy edited manuscript to
answer these "flags" and let Birnes handle this.

Then there is the "page proofs" known in olden times as the
galleys. Corso would have received a copy of the page proofs,
which is a copy of the way the book will look in its final
incarnation. Think photocopy of each page here. The author(s)
read these, mark them up to correct mistakes that might have
escaped the editor, copy editor and author at the other stages.
Here, Corso would have had the opportunity to read the entire
book, as it would appear, and would have had the opportunity to
correct any errors that Birnes had unwittingly introduced into
the manuscript.

We can conclude two things here. Either Corso read the book at
this point and approved, or he didn't bother to read it because
he already knew what it said. In either case, he provided tacit
approval of the contents and it is now too late to go back and
say that someone else is responsible for the mistakes.

As for this story that Simon and Schuster rushed the book into
print to keep the government from censoring it. Crap, again.
They rushed to meet the 50th Anniversary of the Roswell crash.
Get it out after the event and they lose that big advertizing
opportunity.

Now, let's go around again.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                 Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:27:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:34:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...


 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:35:26 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >>Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500

<snip>

 >You're ahead of your time. You can choose to 'conform' to their
 >rules, play the game their way, go along and get along, or...
 >continue to be yourself and to do what you do. As long as you
 >are aware that there is a price to be paid, you should be
 >alright in the end. If you are unwilling or unable to pay that
 >price, then you should be playing the game by their rules if you
 >wish to continue operating within their 'system.'

I don't want acceptance, John. I don't require understanding. I
don't expect appreciation. But what I demand is ethical
toleration. I don't get that-I eat the offender's face. Their
"price" is a mockery, an insult, and an arbitrary convenience.
It's a cowards wage... only a coward pays it. I've a lot of what
they lack: heart and imagination. I'll find another way to
teach.

 >You sign-off all of your e-mails reminding us what happened to
 >good old Bruno with the Fundamentalists. Geez, don't you see the
 >corollary between his case and yours? <LOL>

Yeah-like I said. I thought this was America. I guess we can
both have a big laugh.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND-John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is-the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $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, scourged by
scurrilous skepti-bunkies.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                 Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:03:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:36:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 18:11:57 -0000

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Another Day In The Land Of The Free...
 >>Date: Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:19:06 -0500

 >Alfred,

 >A very sad story indeed. I come from a family of teachers and
 >instructors, as well as citizen soldiers, and have heard some
 >horror stories before (and personally declined teaching as an
 >occupation). You should submit this (or a modified form of it)
 >to your local newspaper, your Congressman, etc.

Thank you, sir. Both senators, the attendant representative, and
the Governor of the state got a copy of this letter. Bupkis!
That explains my going public with it here. All that remains at
this point is to stand at _your_ shoulder, continue to fight in
the real war, and try to ignore the wounds. My country trained
me well (to their apparent horror and chagrin). Thanks again for
the kind words, and know that I was ever the teacher that they
said they wanted, just as I was the soldier.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his HostPros URL.
http://www.alienview.net


JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND-John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is-the more attention he
gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail. $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, scourged by
scurrilous.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                            Re: Serious Research

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:58:38 +1200
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:41:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious Research


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:43:44 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Serious Research

 >>From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Serious Research
 >>Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:14:26 +1200

<snip>

 >>Just to clear up a couple of things that may have been
 >>mis-understood.

 >>I, like John wasn't advocating excluding anyone from the List
 >>either.

 >>Refer to my post to see, I was agreeing with John. It was really
 >>a query as to why we seem to keep rehashing the same old same
 >>old, and why the "unconvincible" stick around.

 >>I see the debunkers/skeptics are a necessary evil :-) (?) (They
 >>keep us honest and on our toes), but I stand by my statement,
 >>"Whats in it for them?" and what sort of pleasure do they get
 >>when they feel they've scored a point! It 's perverse and even
 >>masochistic <g>I have been on a list where debunkers were under
 >>pressure to leave and I would _never_ advocate that, but we
 >>still must have the right to ask the question..."why?"


 >You attribute labels "necessary evil," (to skeptics etc), take
 >pleasure from scoring a point, perverse and masochistic.
 >Fascinating. In any scientific or other debate, this type of
 >attitude might very well be considered paranoia.

 >Has it occured that debate does _not_ keep us on our toes,
 >rather it keeps us thinking. And it does not keep us honest, we
 >are already so! Are we not??

 >Cogito, ergo .. our truth shall prevail in the face of all
 >adversity. This is debate, not a mutual abduction society.

 >Sheesh!


Jim

Touche.

Your points are well taken and noted. What can I say....

Of course we consider ourselves to be honest, (shows what
happens when you resort to cliches eh) (g)

Paranoid?.... maybe (just a little)

But I am sorry you  missed, what I thought the
obvious TIC tone

Far be it for me to elicit a "Sheesh!" from you Jim (jest
kidding)


Cheers,

William












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                       Re: 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:43:06 -0400
Subject: Re: 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:28:20 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ravaged In The Corn


 >"Come in she said, I'll give ya, shelter from the storm." All
 >those who seek shelter on UFO UpDates shall be ravaged in the
 >corn. And everywhere else on the planet. We continuously
 >complain of hearing the same old same old from skeptics. Is it
 >not interesting that we too, we who believe that our experiences
 >are quite real, say the same old same old. Nothing new.
 >Something that I have written on this list on a number of
 >occasions.

 >There is not one shred of anything new from either camp. And it
 >shows. Are we complaining that such is due to hearing (and
 >having to argue) the same old same old on numerous occasions?
 >That this causes a stagnation within us which precludes making
 >progress? Or worse, that we are missing the important points of
 >research by the debate? If so, do what others do. Hit "delete!"

 >The skeptics... they may say the same of our camp. "Hell, we've
 >heard nothing new from anyone in their camp and because of that,
 >we can't prove anything to their contrary!?"

 >Cop outs.

 >There are places on the Internet, sites where the abductee can
 >(theoretically) obtain that which he or she needs. And yet, all
 >I've seen on such sites (having audited several - the number
 >several is about four) there is nothing new there either.
 >Nothing. There is the opportunity for research by those
 >afflicted byt nothing happens except rhetoric, the rhetoric of
 >shared experiences in leiu of rhetoric combined common sense and
 >some honest evaluation of the shared experiences.

 >Same old same old.

 >No original thinking. No original theories. None. In fact in
 >some of these places, original thinking is stultified. Those
 >attempting to do that nasty? Ostracized, criticized and often,
 >castrated. Members having to toe another line of BS.

 >I offer nothing except the criticism of culpable stupidity. I
 >have few theories. And some of these are in the category which
 >some feel is... unacceptable. Tough. Got any bright ideas of
 >your own?

 >Say there... got nothin' to add? Good, then don't subtract!



Jim, List

Although most of what you say I agree with but will add IMO It's
difficult for many to answer to much of what is written on the
list by both skeptics and believers. Yes we do have the same old
same old as I said in my post that you took umbrage too.

Part of the reason IMHO (being very careful here) is that not
all of  us are as eloquent or have a command of the English
language as do many of the prolific posters here do.

Is it any wonder that we are getting the same old same old. If
any new thinking,  or theories are offered out, there are many,
very quick, in both camps to jump well and truly on them with
disguised venom. or if you prefer glee.

Yea call me paranoid, stoopid even, thats just the sort of bloke
I am!

"How dare we offer up new theories on the AA" or discuss the
"Corso" work without being (often) rudely put well and truly in
your place.


With a little more tolerance....

We _will_  get more posts that definately make you go "sheesh",
but there just maybe the odd gem that pops up. Then of course we
do have, as you say "the delete button".

Also may I ad...... (click!)


William  (Mortelly wounded)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                           Re: Ravaged In The Corn

From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:44:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravaged In The Corn


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:28:20 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ravaged In The Corn


 >"Come in she said, I'll give ya, shelter from the storm." All
 >those who seek shelter on UFO UpDates shall be ravaged in the
 >corn. And everywhere else on the planet. We continuously
 >complain of hearing the same old same old from skeptics. Is it
 >not interesting that we too, we who believe that our experiences
 >are quite real, say the same old same old. Nothing new.
 >Something that I have written on this list on a number of
 >occasions.

 >There is not one shred of anything new from either camp. And it
 >shows. Are we complaining that such is due to hearing (and
 >having to argue) the same old same old on numerous occasions?
 >That this causes a stagnation within us which precludes making
 >progress? Or worse, that we are missing the important points of
 >research by the debate? If so, do what others do. Hit "delete!"

 >The skeptics... they may say the same of our camp. "Hell, we've
 >heard nothing new from anyone in their camp and because of that,
 >we can't prove anything to their contrary!?"

 >Cop outs.

 >There are places on the Internet, sites where the abductee can
 >(theoretically) obtain that which he or she needs. And yet, all
 >I've seen on such sites (having audited several - the number
 >several is about four) there is nothing new there either.
 >Nothing. There is the opportunity for research by those
 >afflicted byt nothing happens except rhetoric, the rhetoric of
 >shared experiences in leiu of rhetoric combined common sense and
 >some honest evaluation of the shared experiences.

 >Same old same old.

 >No original thinking. No original theories. None. In fact in
 >some of these places, original thinking is stultified. Those
 >attempting to do that nasty? Ostracized, criticized and often,
 >castrated. Members having to toe another line of BS.

 >I offer nothing except the criticism of culpable stupidity. I
 >have few theories. And some of these are in the category which
 >some feel is... unacceptable. Tough. Got any bright ideas of
 >your own?

 >Say there... got nothin' to add? Good, then don't subtract!



Jim, List

Although most of what you say I agree with but will add IMO It's
difficult for many to answer to much of what is written on the
list by both skeptics and believers. Yes we do have the same old
same old as I said in my post that you took umbrage too.

Part of the reason IMHO (being very careful here) is that not
all of  us are as eloquent or have a command of the English
language as do many of the prolific posters here do.

Is it any wonder that we are getting the same old same old. If
any new thinking,  or theories are offered out, there are many,
very quick, in both camps to jump well and truly on them with
disguised venom. or if you prefer glee.

Yea call me paranoid, stoopid even, thats just the sort of bloke
I am!

"How dare we offer up new theories on the AA" or discuss the
"Corso" work without being (often) rudely put well and truly in
your place.


With a little more tolerance....

We _will_  get more posts that definately make you go "sheesh",
but there just maybe the odd gem that pops up. Then of course we
do have, as you say "the delete button".

Also may I ad...... (click!)


William  (Mortelly wounded)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                          Re: Debunkers' Guidebook

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 01:07:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:45:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Rudiak wrote:

 >>Here's the beginning of Chapter 12 on the Washington DC
 >>radar/visuals of 1952:

 >>"A few days prior to the incident, A SCIENTIST, FROM AN AGENCY
 >>THAT I CAN'T NAME, and I were talking about the build-up of
 >>reports along the east coast of the United States. From his
 >>study of the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force
 >>Headquarters, and from discussions with his colleages, he said
 >>he though that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of
 >>loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days they're going
 >>to blow up and you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO
 >>sightings. The sighting will occur in Washington or New York,'
 >>he predicted, --'probably Washington.'"

 >>Somebody besides the Air Force was obviously paying a lot of
 >>attention to the situation.

 >Sparks wrte:

 >Nope, for reasons I can't get into here, this was a scientist
 >from AF Intelligence.


I wonder if this could have been Stephen Possony?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                              Re: Ravenna 1966

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:49:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:47:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:02:03 EDT
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Young


 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 12:35:30 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:14:22 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I had previously posted:

 >>>>The unknown object, of unknown size, and hence unknown distance,
 >>>>was of course assumed to have passed over those in front. Hell,
 >>>>it was 50 feet across, remember, and they chased it four more
 >>>>than an hour and never caught up to it?

 >>This is contextual distance determination: By passing over
 >>objects of known size (police cars) at known distances (the
 >>police cars) the size and distance to the unknown (the UFO)
 >>becomes known

 >Brad:

 >Actually, this example involves an assumption: the distance
 >when the object was _assumed_ to have been overhead the
 >other police car.


 >Bob


Bob,

The human visual perceptual apparatus can process the contextual
perspective of an object at relatively close range that flies
over an object of known size such as the police car, yielding
the distance to both the known and the unknown.

It is a dynamic relationship that draws on many different visual
cues, aspect angle change, shading, angular velocity and
acceleration/deceleration, trajectory projection and
perspective, occultation or eclipsing of objects, and even the
longer stereoscopic vision baseline formed when one turns one's
head to follow a fast-moving object traveling over a large arc.

(Instead of the 2-inch separation between eyes which limits the
range of stereoscopic vision to about 30 feet, turning one's
head by say 90� can create an effective dynamic baseline of
perhaps 12 inches or even more, thus extending distance
perception out to possibly 180 feet or more;  so much for Larry
Robinson's constant harping on the supposed 30-foot limitation.)

If the UFO had been suddenly seen seemingly hovering over the
other police car it would have been difficult to tell if it was
near or far, but that is a static relationship which does not
invoke the array of dynamic visual cues.  Here in the Portage
County case the UFO traveled at high speed over a large arc.

There has been a fruitless argument going on over the UFO
Skeptics site about this same phenomenon as perceived from an
aircraft.

Brad









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                    Venezuela: Strange Lights In The Sky

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 06:18:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:49:23 -0400
Subject: Venezuela: Strange Lights In The Sky


SOURCE: Ultimas Noticias (newspaper)
DATE: Tuesday, May 29, 2001

STRANGE LIGHTS IN THE SKY

**EVENT: A Concentric Luminesence Manifested Itself for Over
Three Hours in the Avila**

A considerable number of persons residing in Plaza, although the
phenomenon was also seen from Nueva Casarapa, commented
yesterday on the strange lights that flooded the sky over
Guaronas last Sunday.

At around 9:30 p.m., concentric and white lights began moving
through the firmament in the municipality of Plaza. Following
the path of the Moon as it set over Avila, the strange lights
joined and separated, but always moved in unison above the
dense, dark clouds in the sky at that hour.

Some residents contacted the news media to find out if some kind
of celebration was going in the city which would merit the use
of spotlights. The reply was negative.

The personnel on duty at Vigiman witnessed the same phenomenon
and thought that it was somehow related to the opening of the
C.C. Casis Movie Theaters, but such opening had not taken place.
The lights were not projected by any spotlights.

Witnesses who saw the strange event began feeling nervous as the
lights increased their rate of displacement after 10:30 p.m.,
when some kind of laser beams could be seen firing between one
object and the other. At around midnight, with the Moon having
set, the lights diminshed and the sky was completely cleared of
their presence.

There were no reports of alarms nor panic among the population
accoridng to reports provided by the fire department and by Poll
Plaza. Personnel from the Centro de Excursionismo did not
receive any reports on this occasion, although--as they
noted--there have been persisten reports of a light which runs
through the entire zone of Avila. Nor were there any reports of
airline flights over the area at that time.

Most striking to the locals is the phenomenon's high visibility,
particularly in view of the fact that these phenomena tend to
keep a "low profile".

Another detail worth mentioning was the static that filled the
entire area: the air acquired a storm-like feeling, althought no
rain fell. Nor was there the breeze which tends to accompany
stormy conditions.

In any event, the community remains on the lookout, hoping that
the strange event will repeat itself.

########################
Translation (C) 2001. S. Corrales, IHU.
Special Thanks to Dr. Martha Rosenthal, CEINPLA, Caracas






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                 Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 [was Re: Debunkers'

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:12:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:53:38 -0400
Subject: Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 [was Re: Debunkers'


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 01:54:20 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:56:44 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>>Also fingered by Sarbacher as being involved in briefings at
 >>>Wright-Patterson was Dr. Eric Walker (President of Penn State
 >>>University and former head of the Dept. of Electrical
 >>>Engineering and Dean of Engineering and Architecture). Walker
 >>>also served as Executive Secretary of the Research and
 >>>Development Board from 1950 to 1952. The RDB was the brainchild
 >>>of Bush to continue defense-related research and development and
 >>>came into being. Lloyd Berkner, another alleged MJ-12 member was
 >>>Bush's first Executive Secretary (also a member of the CIA's
 >>>infamous Robertson Panel in 1953).

 >>I seem to recall that Walker when interviewed in the 80's was
 >>spouting all kinds of wild conspiracy theories and claims -
 >>JFK?, Nazis ? I think it's in a Hesemann book.

 >>>Another member of the RDB who independently named Bush, Berkner,
 >>>von Neumann, and Walker as either probably or definitely
 >>>involved was Dr. Fred Darwin, who was the RDB's Executive
 >>>Director of the Guided Missile Committee from 1949 to 1954.
 >>>William Steinman interviewed Walker by phone in 1987. According
 >>>to Steinman's transcript of his phone conversation, Walker
 >>>initially admitted to attending meetings of the RDB "concerning
 >>>the military recovery of flying saucers and the bodies of
 >>>occupants" around 1950. When Steinman brought up the subject of
 >>>MJ-12, Steinman said Walker's reply was, "Yes, I know of MJ-12.
 >>>I have known of them for 40 years."

 >>That would be before Walker served on the RDB in 1950-2. We have
 >>to rely on Steinman's memory and interpretations since there is
 >>no transcript and Steinman may have read his own knowledge into
 >>it.

 >>>(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
 >>>conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

 >Hello, Brad, David:

 >The obvious reading of Walker's comments, to me, was that he was
 >answering Steinman's questions very tongue in cheek. At one
 >point he told him that he sure doesn't have any aliens in his
 >office at Penn State. The so called clamming up seems to have
 >been after Walker realized that he was getting these calls from
 >somebody without a sense of humor who was quite serious about
 >his preposterous questions - a real saucer nut.

As usual, Bob Young resorts to gross misrepresentation in order
to debunk. There were multiple conversations with people other
than Steinman, and at no time does Walker talk about "aliens in
his closet" with Steinman (that was with somebody else). Walker
was clearly quite serious initially with Steinman.

I would also like to clear up Brad Sparks suggestion that Walker
was spouting all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories in his
conversations. I wish Brad wouldn't resort to debunker tactics
of trying to discredit people by ridiculing simply because he
doesn't believe in the existence of an organization such as
MJ-12. The "MJ-12 papers" could all be fakes, yet there could
still have existed an MJ-12-type group, whether under that name
or something else.

Instead, we should be listening carefully to what Walker had to
say after being fingered as being involved by Drs. Sarbacher and
Darwin, both formerly associated with the Research and
Development board around 1950.

Furthermore, it is simply not true, as Brad indicates, that
there was no transcript of the conversation with Steinman.

The following is the actual initial contact conversation between
Steinman and Walker. This took place August 30, 1987. Readers
can decide for themselves whether Walker was answering Steinman
"tongue in cheek" at this point or talking about "aliens in his
office" or treated Steinman as if he was asking "preposterous
questions."

Incidentally, this and following transcripts come from Grant
Cameron's and T. Scott Crain's MUFON publication, 'UFOs, MJ-12
and the Government'.


Steinman:...I am calling in reference to the meetings you
attended at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in/around 1949-1950,
concerning the military recovery of flying saucers and bodies of
occupants.

Dr. Robert I. Sarbacher (now deceased) related this to me. You
and Sarbacher were both consultants to D.R.B. [Actually R.D.B.
-- Research and Development Board] in 1950; you were Secretary
1950-51.

Walker: Yes, I attended meetings concerning the subject matter; why do you
want to know about that?

Steinman: I believe it is [a] very important subject. After all,
we... are talking about the actual recovery of a flying saucer
(spacecraft) not built or constructed on this earth! And
furthermore, we are talking about bodies of the occupants from
the craft who were analyzed [to be] human-like beings not of
this world!

Walker: So... what's there to get all excited about? Why all the
concern?

Steinman: I am not excited, just very concerned. Here we are
talking about a subject that the U.S. Government officially
denies, even going to the extent of actually debunking the
evidence and discrediting the witnesses. then you sit there and
say, "What's there to get all excited about?" and "Why all the
concern?"

Dr. Vannevar Bush, Dr. O. W. Bronk, and others thought it was
very important and were concerned enough to classify the subject
ABOVE TOP SECRET, in fact the most highly classified subject in
the U.S. Government!!

Did you ever hear of the "MJ-12 Group" and their "Project
Majestic-12" which was classified as TOP SECRET/MAJIC? I have a
copy of President Elect D. D. Eisenhower's briefing paper on
that project, dated November 18, 1952.

Walker: Yes, I know of MJ-12. I have known of them for 40 years.
I believe that you're chasing after and fighting with
windmills!!

Steinman: Why do you say that?

Walker: You are delving into an area that you can do absolutely
nothing about. So, why get involved with it or all concerned
about it? Why don't you just leave it alone and drop it. Forget
about it!!

Steinman: I am not going to drop it. I am going all the way with
this!!

Walker: Then... when you find out everything about it, what are
you going to do?

Steinman: I believe that this entire matter has to be brought to
the public's attention. The people should know the truth!!

Walker: It's not worth it!! Leave it alone!!

Steinman: Can you remember any of the details pertaining to the
recovery operations and subsequent analysis of the saucers and
bodies?

Walker: I am sure that I have notes concerning those meetings at
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. I would have to dig them out
and read them over in order to jog my memory.

Steinman: If I write you a letter, will you please answer in as
much detail as you can remember? Furthermore, could you please
xerox those notes for me and send me a copy?

Walker: I might. At least I will keep your letter, will dig out
my notes, and [will] contemplate answering. That's the best I
can say for now.

Except for the hellos and the goodbyes, that was the complete
conversation. Again, I ask, anything about hiding aliens in his
office or treating Steinman like "a real saucer nut?"

No, not at all. Walker initially admits to attending meetings at
Wright-Patterson concerning the recovery of flying saucers and
alien bodies. He says he knows of MJ-12 and says he might answer
more of Steinman's questions after he digs out his notes on the
meetings.

Walker does talk down to Steinman as somebody he thinks is
delving into a subject that is way over his head and which he
can do nothing about. But in no way does he treat Steinman or
the subject matter as being crazy.

Here is Steinman's follow-up letter, dated Sept. 1, 1987

"Dear Dr. Walker:

"This is in response to our telephone conversation of Aug. 30,
1987, and in reference to my letter to you dated May 31, 1984,
concerning the military recovery of flying saucers and the
scientific analysis of the bodies of the occupants, therefrom.

"During that telephone conversation, you mentioned knowing of
the group known as "MJ-Twelve" and their project known as
"Operation Majestic-12", who were responsible for the analysis
of both the saucers and the occupants taken from them. They are
also responsible for the strict security covering the project.

"Can you also verify and tell me about "Project Aquarius", that
involved contacting the saucer occupants and setting up a sort
of alliance with them.

"Please look for those notes concerning those Wright-Patterson
AFB meetings concerning the above mentioned subject matter."

It was at this point that Walker started getting evasive and
responding to Steinman "tongue in cheek" with the following
response, dated Sept. 23, 1987.

"Dear Mr. Steinman:

"Some things you have right, and some things you have wrong. The
machine itself was obviously a landing vehicle only, and it had
no unusual features and no power plants with which we were not
quite familiar. I believe it still exists and is kept someplace
near Wright Field.

"Your greatest error, of course, comes in the finding of the
bodies -- there were no bodies; there were four very normal
individuals, all male. Unfortunately, they had no memory of
anything in the past (probably by design), but they were highly
intelligent. They learned the English language with a few hours
and it was our decision not to make public spectacles of them,
but allow them to be absorbed into American culture as soon as
we were sure that they did not bring any contamination with
them."

Then Walker talked about one becoming a very successful computer
entrepeneur, the second a "world famous athlete", the third a
Wall Street raider, etc. Then Walker ended the letter with:

"I hope that you will let matters lie as they are. The results
are completely satisfactory, and nothing is to be gained by
further publicity."

Here is the conversation that Walker had with T. Scott Crain
April 20, 1988, where Walker doesn't deny anything, but simply
refuses to talk about it:

Crain: I've been doing some rather intensive research into some
meetings that occurred in the late 40s and early 50s at
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base involving crashed UFOs and alien
occupants. And I understand that when you were executive
secretary of the Research and Development board that you had
attended these meetings. Do you recall that?

Walker: What meeting?

Crain: It was some meetings at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
and they were talking about alien occupants that were recovered.
Can you recall that?

Walker: You're talking about UFOs?

Crain: UFOs, right.

Walker: This is a subject that I don't talk about.

Crain: OK... I understand from Robert Sarbacher that you were...
that you attended those meetings.

Walker: I say, this is not a subject that I talk about.

Crain: OK... so you're saying you don't want to talk about it
because of what... national security?

Walker: No.... I'm saying I just don't want to talk about it.

Crain: OK... can you tell me _anything_ about it?

Walker: Nope, not a thing.

Crain: OK... it must be a national security reason then... it's
the only thing I can think of.

Walker: Well, there's nothing I can say... so there's no good
talking about it. I'm sorry. Thank you.

Then in a conversation with Crain on Oct. 9, 1988, Walker
completely denied knowing anything about Majestic-12 and also
denied writing the letter to Steinman in Sept. 1987 about the
four live beings eventually integrated into American society.

Tom Mickus called Walker on August 11, 1989. Walker denied
having any memory of the meetings in question at Wright
Patterson, but never explicitly denied attending such meetings.
Finally we get to Bob Young's distorted "aliens in my office"
comment of Dr. Walker:

Mickus: But, you're saying that it [subject matter of meetings]
had nothing to do with UFOs or alien bodies, or anything like
this?

Walker: Well, I don't have any alien bodies in my office, I can
tell you that.

Mickus:...So, therefore, you deny ever having any relationship
whatsoever in your earlier government dealings with the
discussion of UFOs or alien bodies, anything like that, you deny
that was part of the Research & Development Board meetings and
subsequent activities that you may have been involved with?

Walker:  [slight laugh] You know, you're just wasting your time
and money, and I'm sorry but I've got other things to do.

Mickus: Okay, but if I could just get an on-the-record
comment... response from you on that, because I don't know, I
think you may be hearing more about this because if this thing
gets in wide circulation, you may have other people knocking on
your door trying to get a reaction.

Walker: I don't have any reaction, I'm sorry. [hangs up]

Walker continued to play his cat and mouse game when further
contacted. Never did Walker simply say, "I haven't the slightest
idea about anything you're talking about. I never attended
meetings about flying saucer and alien body recoveries. I know
nothing about the subject of UFOs. Please go away and leave me
alone." Instead, he continued to have conversations like the
following in 1990 with Dr. Henry Azadehdel, alias Dr. Henry
Victorian:

Jan. 26, 1990

Azadehdel:...With due respect, you are a scientist, a well-known
one, and you know. I am a physicist and rather keep myself to
myself. My interest is purely scientific more than anything
else. Is it determined from which star system they come from?

Walker: Ah, I do not think so.

Azadehdel: Is it still unknown?

Walker: I think that is the picture, I am not sure.

Azadehdel: But what amazes me, Doctor, is the frequent
appearance of these objects. Does this suggest that they might
have a base in one of our solar system planets?

Walker: Well, we can make a point of all these, but they did not
tell us.

Azadehdel: Have we ever been able to make contact with them on
the communication basis?

Walker: We promised not to tell.

Azadehdel: I can understand it. Does it mean that the official
communication has been made, and it has been promised not to
tell? Orders are that outside this circle there are private
[bits of] information they should not know (the public?).

Walker: I do not think it is official. If three, four
individuals have got together on this, it can't be official.

Azadehdel: Do they consistitute a threat to the national
security of any country?

Walker: Everybody decides on this on his own.

March 8, 1990:

Azadehdel:...Doctor, I was reading a book titled "Above Top
Secret." There were some documents there referring to a group
better known as MJ-12. Have you heard of them?

Walker: For [a] long time now, I have nothing to do with them.

Azadehdel: Are the documents authentic?

Walker: I don't think so.

Azadehdel: Doctor, but is there any such group still active?

Walker: (Silence) How good is your mathematics?

Azadehdel: As good as it could be for a doctor in physics, but
why?

Walker: Because only a very few are capable of handling this
issue. Unless your mind ability is like Einstein's or likewise,
I do not think how you can achieve anything.

Azadehdel: Well, Doctor, for many years now I have been trying.
but, are there government scientists?

Walker: Everybody mistakes about this issue. I gather by that
you mean whether they work for the Defense establishments of the
military.

Azadehdel: Yes, Doctor, that is what I meant.

Walker: Well, that is where you are wrong. They are a handful of
elite. When you are invited into that group, I would know.

Azadehdel:...Are you a member of that group?

Walker: I cannot answer that....

Azadehdel:...Doctor, are there any military people in that
group?

Walker: No.

Azadehdel: Have we used any derivatives of the learnt technology
in the military?

Walker. I cannot answer that question. You are trying to squeeze
the answers out of me. If you are invited into this group, I
would know.

Azadehdel: Are the members 10, 12, 14, are they all Americans?

Walker: I cannot give you the numbers, and no, not necessarily,
they are not all Americans.

Azadehdel: Doctor, have we master[ed] the knowledge, are we
working together with the entitities?

Walker: No, we have learnt so much, and we are not working with
them, only contact.

Azadehdel: Have we captured any saucers, any material from the
discs to study?

Walker: The technology is far behind [beyond?] what is known in
ordinary terms of physics that you take the measure and obtain
measurements. You are pushing for answers, aren't you?

Azadehdel: Doctor, I have obtained a report called Project
Magnet. Have you ever met Wilbert Smith who worked on this
project in Canada?

Walker: No, I don't believe having met this person.

Azadehdel: Is the concept on the Electromagnetic or Gravity?

Walker: As I said, it is far behind [beyond?] the know level of
physics that is know. A very few have knowledge of it.

Azadehdel: ...Doctor, I guess this subject is like chasing the
whirlwind.

Walker: Well, yes. but if you capture the whirlwind, what do you
want to do with it?

Azadehdel: It is a very good and valid question, one which...
that sort of analogy from my point of view does not apply to it.
I am not going to pass on a judgment on it, to whether it is
good or bad, and hence I should not follow it up for those
reasons. I am a scientist, looking for the answers and
solutions. I guess like any other scientific problems which I
might encounter.

Walker: As I said, very few who are not officials have been able
to work [with them], and if you are invited into their circle, I
would know.

There was another conversation Azadehdel had with Walker on Aug.
18, 1990. I'm getting tired of typing, but Azadehdel asked
questions about whether there was a group called MAJESTIC-12,
whether it might still exist, who were the doctors who conducted
the autopsies, and the like. Walker was evasive, again never
denying knowledge, but saying he didn't recall and would have to
go look up the answers.

Finally Azadehdel asked again about bodies, to which Walker
replied, "You jump to the hasty conclusion. Maybe some walked
away, maybe some did not walk away. As I say, it is none of your
business. Just to satisfy your curiosity... it is not going to
do any damn good except making you happy. Is it not true? Are we
to change all the plans and regulations just to make you happy?
If you say that you are looking for the truth, you will never
get it anyway, so forget it?"

In summary, when first contacted by Steinman in 1987, Walker
admitted to knowing about MJ-12 and acknowledged attending
meetings at Wright-Patterson about crashed saucers and alien
bodies when he was the Excecutive Secretary for the Research &
Development Board in 1950-51. After first contact, he became
evasive, to one interviewer (Crain) simply saying he couldn't
talk about it. He seemingly wrote the strange letter about 4
live human entities at Roswell integrated into American life,
then denied ever writing it.

With Azadehdel he was more forthcoming, but still evasive. His
answers clearly indicated that there was still some sort of
highly elite working group, but couldn't be nailed down on
specifics. He indicated that the principles governing UFOs were
still far beyond present-day physics. He implied that there had
been contact, or, at least, attempts at contact.

A common thread in conversations with various people were
Walker's statements that they were in over their heads, that
there was nothing they could do, so they might as well forget
about it or leave well enough alone.

People can judge for themselves whether Walker was talking to
the interviewers like they were "saucer nuts" or whether he was
choosing his words carefully after his first contact (in which
he admits to a great deal) and trying not to say too much or
deflect them in the wrong direction. Furthermore, he never says
he knows nothing and hangs up, as I think an exceptionally busy
man like Walker would have said had he truly known nothing. But
people should read the conversations and make their own
judgments.


 >Clear skies,

 >Bob Young

Clear thinking and honest posts...

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                          Filer's Files #22 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:42:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:59:15 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #22 -- 2000


Filer's Files #22 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
May 29, 2001, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, Majorstar@aol.com.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,

UFOs are observed in space and over New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Washington DC, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Arizona
abduction, Nevada, California, and England.

VISITORS FROM SPACE CAUSE HUGE EXPLOSION

Researcher Joe Stefula reports that on April 23, US orbiting
satellites detected a blinding flash of light several hundred
miles southwest of Los Angeles over the Pacific Ocean. Shock
waves were picked up as far away as South America. In an abrupt
news release on May 25, the Air Force's Technical Applications
Center, at Patrick Air Force Base in Florida, said the flash
was "non-nuclear" and consistent with observed meteor
explosions. Most likely a speeding meteoroid from outer space
had crashed into the Earth's atmosphere causing an intense
fireball. Bright flashes were detected for more than two
seconds. Dr. Douglas O. ReVelle, a federal scientist who helps
run the military detectors claimed this was the third largest
intruder since global satellite observations started a quarter
century ago. The explosion in our atmosphere had nearly the
force of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Ground based
sensors at Los Alamos and other bases detected the sounds of
the blast. ! The rocky meteors are anywhere from a few feet to
about 80 feet wide. They vanish in massive explosions high in
our atmosphere. The fireballs are seldom seen because they
usually occur over the sea or uninhabited areas.

Editor's Note: Our satellites regularly detect incoming objects
from space that strike our Earth's atmosphere. These are
generally referred to as uncorrelated targets indicating they
are not in the computer database of known space objects.
Satellites regularly pick up objects both entering and leaving
our atmosphere. Some scientists speculate they may not all be
meteors and some might represent UFOs.

A NEW US SPACE FORCE

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld has proposed major
changes that sharply increase the importance of outer space in
strategic planning. The proposal will be the first step toward
making space a focus of Department of Defense spending for the
development of weapon systems for outer space that include
antiballistic missile defenses, anti satellite weapons and
airborne laser offensive weapons. Mr. Rumsfeld will call for
the establishment of a new Pentagon post for a four-star Air
Force general to serve as an advocate for what could become a
new Space Force. He indicated he would ask for billions of
dollars of new spending.

EDITORS NOTE - The Soviet space program is in disarray and
needs money from tourists to keep operating. Although China is
attempting to put a man in space they are far behind. The
logical question is who will this new Space Force fight? Why
are we preparing for battles in space? The videos taken from
our Space Shuttle flights regularly show UFOs passing in the
distance. Is part of our Space Force already in orbit, or are
we preparing for battle against aliens? If we are preparing for
a fight with the taxpayer's money, isn't it reasonable to ask
who might be our enemy?

NASA PILOT JOSEPH A. WALKER ON UFOs

On May 11, 1962, NASA pilot Joseph Walker said that one of his
tasks was to detect UFOs during his X-15 flights. He had filmed
five or six UFOs during his record breaking fifty-mile-high
flight in April 1962. It was the second time he had filmed UFOs
in flight. During a lecture at the Second National Conference
on the Peaceful Uses of Space Research in Seattle, Washington
he said: I don't feel like speculating about them. All I know
is what appeared on the film, which was developed after the
flight. To date none of those films has been released to the
public for viewing.

DISCLOSURE PROJECT UPDATE -- I was one of twenty former
military and government employees who spoke at one of the
largest press briefings ever on May 9, 2001, at the National
Press Club in Washington DC. Organized by Dr. Stephen Greer the
speakers told the press that UFOs and aliens exist and have
bases on the Moon and here on Earth. Several officers briefed
how UFOs shut down our Minuteman missiles and over flew nuclear
weapons sites. Details were given concerning UFO crashes, near
misses, and possible offensive action by UFOs. Collectively
these people know more about UFOs than any speakers I have ever
heard, anytime and anywhere. They spoke for a few minutes each,
but most have amazing detailed knowledge of our alien visitors.
Probably the biggest story of millennium was handed to the news
media and they appear afraid or were prevented from publishing
the story. The question is why did this amazing story hardly
reach the American public? Several hundred plus reporte! rs did
not report the UFO news, but ran with the release of FBI
documents story concerning Timothy McVeigh. Through
Connectlive.com the press conference reached some 250,000
people, but was not generally carried in the National News
reports. I received an e-mail from a Congressional staffer who
encouraged us all to write, fax, and call your congressmen
asking for Congressional Hearings.

NEW YORK DISCS PASS OVER TWICE

BROOKLYN -- On April 28, 2001, a sky watcher who lives near
LaGuardia Airport, was watching the landing of a commercial
flight at around 1:00 PM in the afternoon, when he noticed two
strange objects come into view. They were at a very high
altitude compared to the commercial jet flights. Both unknown
objects were white in color and oval shaped. They were
traveling east at a very rapid speed and flew out of sight
within ten seconds or less. The witness says, "The unusual part
of this sighting is that several hours later about 4:00 PM, I
was on my roof with binoculars watching, to my astonishment the
exact same two objects came into my view again." This was
something that in all my years of sky watching I have never
experienced. Both sightings were identical as far as color and
shape, but on the second sighting the objects were traveling
south. During the second over flight they flew side-by-side and
steady. Using my binoculars I can positively say they were oval
with no! wings what so ever. These objects did not have wings,
were not birds or balloons. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director
NUFORC

NEW JERSEY CYLINDER OVERTAKES JETS

MILFORD -- I sat down on deck behind our house on May 1, 2001,
and saw a military plane flying at about 50,000 feet heading
south at 4:45 PM at high speed. I see them often. This time
something approached the plane from behind and overtook it at
an amazing speed. I thought it was the space shuttle because I
knew it was going to land that day. There was no exhaust flume,
so I assumed that it was our shuttle. I called my wife outside
to look. She did so and was amazed at the speed. It left our
view seconds later so I went inside and got online with the
NASA website. They indicated the shuttle had touched down at
9:10 this morning. So what was that we saw?

MATAWAN -- Jacqueline Williams writes that a few years ago, I
witnessed a large triangular object flying over us while we
sitting in my Jacuzzi spa. The Flying Triangle was as big as a
football field and had 3 lights on either side and a light in
the middle. As it flew silently over us, the lights and the
pump on the Jacuzzi spa suddenly turned off. I told many people
about this experience and after much negativity, I decided to
keep it to myself. Recently I have had to privilege to have
custody of a 16-year-old boy whose mother is very ill. Last
week, (May 20?) he came running into the house, out of breath.
He said he'd been sitting on the Jacuzzi lid looking at the
stars, when he saw a huge triangular shaped object fly
overhead. He said it was enormous in size and had 3 lights on
each side and one large one in the middle. He said it was
silent. Then two more came toward it, and they all shot off
into the night sky. He drew a picture of the craft that was
exactly li! ke the one the three of us had seen. We told him
our story and he slept with the lights on that night. Now we
both go outside at night and glance at the sky hoping to have
another opportunity to see those objects again. Thanks to
Jacqueline Williams JakJr65@aol.com

PENNSYLVANIA DISK

GREENVILLE -- On May 3, 2001, the witness observed a shiny,
silver object in the sky moving east. He reports, "I was
driving north at 1:43 PM, in my 24 square mile region of patrol
that borders the Pennsylvania-Ohio line and is located 15 miles
east of the Youngstown, Ohio Airport, and the Air Force Reserve
Base." It is because of my job that I am reluctant to make this
report at all. I am familiar with most of the types of planes,
helicopters, and dirigibles that fly in and around this area.
The object I saw on this particular day was a silver color that
was definitely more intense than any of the planes I usually
see. The object was circular in shape and had no visible wings.
Because I was in a moving vehicle traveling at a speed of 45
miles per hour, I could not estimate the speed of the object as
it moved in an easterly direction. I can only guess its size
and distance from me as 1 to 2 miles and the approximate size
of a quarter held at arm's length. I attempted t! o pull off
the roadway to get a better visual and maybe a still photo, but
as I slowed down the object accelerated upward at a tremendous
speed and was gone in an instant. The weather was sunny and the
sky was exceptionally clear. This is notable because this area
is usually shrouded in cloud coverage known as the Great Lakes
Effect. This report is a result of my interest in knowing if
anyone else had witnessed that particular event. Thanks to
NUFORC

WASHINGTON DC OVAL UFO SIGHTING

Linda Willitts reports that on May 11, 2001, there was a UFO
sighting during the Disclosure Project activities at 2:55 PM.
They witnessed a large silver round object floating over the DC
area from a hilltop on Wilson Boulevard just outside of the
district. Two witnesses confirmed the sighting with me. We
observed a ball shaped object, metallic silver in color, float
in an easterly direction, until it became hard to see. Thanks
to XingPt@cs.com, coordinator@cseti.org

GEORGIA FLYING TRIANGLE SHAPED CRAFT HOVERS OVER TREES

MARIETTA -- Two witnesses were driving up a road near their
home when they saw what first appeared to be a helicopter
flying very low on April 31, 2001. At 3:47 PM, the witnesses
saw the craft was only a few feet above the trees. It had a
triangular shape and there was no evidence of blades on the
craft. The witness stated, "One thing I am certain, it was not
any type of helicopter mainly for two reasons that it made no
sound, and second there would be some type of physical blade
activity in that general area of the craft since it was so low
in altitude. The wind velocity did not cause the branches to
sway even though it passed just above them. After seeing the
craft, it seemed to have had a 'sense' of something and it
finally darted back behind the tall pines trees. It did not
take more than three seconds to drive to where we could see
behind the trees and the full sky and any normal object would
clearly be in view. It was gone and there was nothing. I have
not witnes! sed a UFO that close and in broad daylight. It was
spectacular. There was not a cloud in the sky, and you could
see the metallic sheen of the craft. It truly was fascinating.
The witness had never reported anything like this before mainly
because he does his own research, but felt this needs to be
heard. Thanks to NUFORC.

INDIANA SAUCER

CROTHERSVILLE -- MUFON Headquarters reports that on May 22,
2001, that the witnesses were looking east out their living
room window at 11:30 PM, when they noticed a rotating light
moving slowly north. The witness asked, "Sue, turn the light
out. There is something strange out there." They could see a
glowing object, shaped like the old baby moon hubcaps of the
60's on top and bottom or like a squashed sphere with its
horizontal axis about three or four times longer than its
vertical axis. Its entire surface glowed with a yellow or gold.
There was a diffuse bright white light slowly sweeping around
its equator like the moon rising in intensity. The white light
was not a point source nor did it have a high contrast outline.
There were no distinguishing marks on the surface of the main
object so the witness couldn't tell if the main object was
rotating with a fixed beacon at one point on its equator or
whether the object was fixed and the light moved around its
equator.

The house sits at the west end of a field with woods on three
sides. The ground in the east woods drops immediately into a
streambed then rises gradually. About a mile east of the house
are US Highway 31 and the town of Crothersville. The witness
stated, "We got a good look at this thing, it was just at
treetop level near the north end of the field and moving
north." We had one better look at it through an opening in the
trees before it was completely hidden from view. It was about
the size of the moon rising, though Sue says about two to three
times that big. In any case it spanned two or three big trees
as it began to be eclipsed by them. I think I saw it for about
30 seconds before we turned out the light and 10 seconds after.
It seemed to be moving north very slowly the whole time. Sue
commented that it seemed to hover. After it disappeared Sue
looked at me and said, "I sure am glad somebody saw this thing
besides me." I called the Indiana State Police post in S!
eymour and asked if they had any reports about strange flying
objects. They were polite, but no. I talked to the editor of
the Crothersville Times. He hadn't heard anything either.
Thanks to MUFON Headquarters. This case is under further
investigation by Indiana MUFON

ILLINOIS REPEAT SIGHTINGS

MARION -- On May 4, 2001, the witnesses saw several circularly
rotating red, blue, and green lights at 1:00 PM. The witness
says, "It all started several ago when we all began seeing a
large light in the sky which was always located around the
Creal Springs area." It starts as a bright blue light in the
sky and always flashes red to blue or green while it gradually
gets smaller. Later it may get larger and disappear totally
only to reappear again flashing and changing size. I myself
have seen it many times. Sometimes it sends off similar smaller
craft, which weave and spiral around. At other times they shoot
straight off of it. My friends and I have seen it move across
the horizon in less than two minutes. My friend and I have seen
the UFOs flashing with multiple red, blue, and green lights
that apparently were a rotating object. Sightings occur
regularly at the lake and towards Creal. Others and I commonly
see the craft in these areas. I saw it last night, and toda! y
it did not surprise me to find a field with a circle on a patch
of ground clearly visible from the road. I also went back and
took pictures. Thanks to NUFORC.

ARIZONA ABDUCTION

GLENDALE -- Bill Hamilton writes regarding last weeks Filer's
Files #21 where the abductee asks the aliens, "How do you
navigate through space and survive?" I was told that they used
their minds for navigational purposes!"

Bill says, "Something struck me about this sentence, there is a
biological to digital control as best the aliens could explain
it to me. It takes three aliens to properly fly and navigate
this craft for interstellar travel!" In my book, ALIEN MAGIC, I
recount an experience I had on May 8, 1981. I was alone in my
house in Glendale, Arizona at the time and it was hot that
night. I went to bed around midnight with only a sheet on the
bed. Around 1:00 AM, I was still not asleep but drifting in a
hypnologic state of consciousness when I suddenly became aware
of 3 little guys standing at the foot of my bed. I could not
seem to open my eyes, but I could still see them. They were
white as marshmallows. Surprised, I asked (in my mind), "Where
did you come from?" The leader in front had a hyper-mind link
with the other two and answered me, "We came from Casa Grande."
"No, no, that is not what I mean," I replied thinking that was
an absurd literal answer to my question. "I mea! n, where do
you come from...from out there." Then I received an answer,
"from the Pleiades." This confused me even more. Before
departing, the leader looked straight into my mind and I heard
a high-pitched frequency that penetrated deeply as if he sent
me an encoded data packet that recorded it itself at some deep
layer of my mind. Then, they were gone!

I leaped out of bed with my adrenaline running and heard the
sound of the curtain flapping in the breeze. It seems like I
had been holding my breath and when I did breath in deeply, I
could smell ozone permeating the room as if some electrical
outlet was shorting out. The aftermath of this bedroom
encounter was that a friend told me the next day that she had
been out walking the dog in the heat of the night and saw a UFO
hovering over Phoenix at about 1:00 AM. A week later my friend
Carl, living in Casa Grande, reported an encounter that same
night when he saw a light in his trailer and could smell the
whiff of ozone in the air! My point is: The 3 aliens formed a
unit. I knew this. They were synthetic and absorbed light
through their skin for energy. This 3-unit performed a number
of tasks together. That is what struck me about this story from
Filer's Files. Now enough about my own crazy experiences and
back to being the skeptical researcher and hard-nosed
investigat! or. Since Alien Magic has been out of print I
decided to publish it as an e-book. Thanks to Bill Hamilton
Executive Director of Skywatch International.

NEVADA SIGHTING

LAS VEGAS -- Milton Malone writes, I am from Birmingham
Alabama. I spent this past week in Las Vegas at a software
users conference at the Paris Casino and Resort. On Wednesday,
May 23, 2001, as I was lying by the pool around 4:00 PM I saw
an object hovering in the clear blue sky. It appeared about as
large as a small flat nail head at arms length (the kind used
to hang picture frames). As I was observing the object it was
changing color from electric pink to silver to white. It also
appeared to become distorted at times. I was viewing with the
unaided eye. It hovered for seven minutes and then began to
make a slow trek through the sky in a westerly direction. A few
others saw the object with me as well. Thanks to Milton Malone.
Mars2012

CALIFORNIA CLOSE LOOK AT FLYING TRIANGLE

PENN VALLEY/LAKE WILDWOOD - Six witnesses observed a strange
light moving around in the sky about 1000 yards from their home
on May 7, 2001. At 8:10 PM, they noticed what at first appeared
to be a plane with landing lights on hovering above a hill.
After watching for a minute or so the witness grabbed a camera.
The witness says, "The craft slowly came our way very slowly
but made no noise. I snapped photos (not developed as of this
writing) as it came towards us at about 200 feet in the air. As
it passed very slowly over the house I could hear no sound. It
was shaped like a large wing with white lights illuminating the
bottom that was not smooth but had a lot of structure. As it
came towards me it had two big white lights close together
pointing forward and blue, red and white lights as it moved
slowly out of sight. Thanks to NUFORC

SAN DIEGO -- A giant whirlpool was video taped live by an
aircraft pilot off the coast of California on May 10, 2001. It
was shown on the Channel 2 News in Los Angeles at 5:00 PM
Scientists claim they have no explanation for the whirlpool and
have never seen anything like it. The photograph shows a very
impressive and strong vortex phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean.

THOUGHT SCREEN FOR ABDUCTIONS

Michael Menkin writes that I am seeking possible alien
abductees to test a thought screen helmet, which has been
successful in stopping aliens from abducting humans. Any
abductee can call me at 425-454-2355. All information is
confidential. Thanks to Michael Menkin menkin@nwlink.com

Editors Note: I have no first hand knowledge of this device and
Mike's claims. Other abductees have reported that their
abductions stop with strong positive prayer.

UNITED KINGDOM SIGHTINGS

WEST YORKSHIRE -- Jonathan Hague writes, I live near Todmorden,
England one of the hottest spots for UFO sightings. Strange
lights in the sky are not uncommon around here. Everyone has a
story to tell. During the last week two US Super Stallion
Helicopters have been seen flying low over the area. There
maybe a reasonable explanation for this, but they do not
normally fly over this area. Thanks to Jon Hague
jlhague@yahoo.com

EXETER -- On May 19, 2001, the witness reports, "My wife and I
were in our back yard at approximately 23.30 hours GMT in the
Wonford area." We saw three aircraft at high altitude pass
overhead in rapid succession, heading for London. In the heavy
traffic, we both saw a luminous gray object suddenly appear
directly overhead traveling in a straight line and heading
towards Exeter Airport. It was not a plane (no noise, no
navigation lights. It was in sight for about 7 to 10 seconds
before disappearing into the general haze created by the city
lights. It was oblong, with the long side leading. My
perception is that it was flying at 1000 feet altitude and was
about the size of an airbus traveling at airspeed of 100 m.p.h.
Thanks to Kenny Young - U F O  R e s e a r c h
http://home.fuse.net/ufo/

THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION

David E. Twichell writes, "The ancient astronaut and Biblical
UFO hypotheses are not new. However, no one seems to want to
take the matter to the next logical step. If Ezekiel's, "wheel
within a wheel," and Moses', "pillar of fire and cloud," were
forerunners of today's UFOs, then the Star of Bethlehem and the
brilliant cloud to which Jesus ascended must be treated in the
same vein. When Biblical descriptions of anomalous aerial
phenomena are overlaid on that of modern-day UFO reports, the
picture seems to meld as one. Once the evidence has been
presented, the reader is led to a conclusion that is at best
convincing and at least thought provoking. Are you willing to
risk having your worldview shaken? Read the preface free at:
http://hometown.aol.com/fi4mufon/myhomepage/index.html To order
your copy of THE UFO - JESUS CONNECTION, go to:
http://www.buybooksontheweb.com Or Save the shipping charges
and order your autographed copy by sending a check or money
order for $13.95! (US) per copy to: David Twichell, P.O. Box
511, Trenton MI. 48183-0511

PHOTOGRAPH BOOKLET of some of the best UFO photographs
available and data on their propulsion systems by US Navy
Commander Graham Bethune. $10.00. Send check or money order to
G. Filer 222 Jackson Road, Medford, New Jersey 08055. CD OF
FILER'S FILES for the last four years 1997 through 2000 is
available for $25.00. Both for $30.00.

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
were caught on recent Shuttle video footage. Jeff has over an
hour-long tape of UFOs shot in space. Jeff spends hundreds of
hours watching the shuttle broadcasts from space and is now an
expert on NASA missions and even those onboard the shuttle are
unlikely to see what Jeff does. Using Jeff's directions you
will be able to learn the difference between space junk, ice
crystals and real UFOs. One segment has 24 UFOs watching the
shuttle from space. I feel confident we could go into a court
of law and convince any jury, UFOs are moving around our Earth.
Send $25 to: Jeff Challender 2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento,
California 95833-2011.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $30 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@Aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2001 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from the
files on their Web Sites provided they credit the newsletter
and its editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. Caution: Most of these are initial reports and
require further investigation. These reports and comments are
not necessarily the official MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters
to Majorstar@Aol.com. Sending mail automatically grants
permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if
you wish to keep your name, address, or story confidential.












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                         Tracking Bomb-Size Meteors

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:06:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:00:30 -0400
Subject: Tracking Bomb-Size Meteors


List,

Here's the URL for that NY Times article;

Go to

http://www.anomalist.com

Then click on "Tracking Bomb_Size Meteors."

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                 Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:55:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:03:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs?


 >From: Joe McGonagle <joe@mcgonaglenet.freeserve.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Crash Retrieval, 9 Bodies, Three UFOs?
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:03:47 +0100

 >I don't know why, but I haven't seen any response on this List
 >to my original post about this on 16 May 2001, perhaps it is to
 >do with the service problems. My original post is at:

 >http://www.aliensonearth.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m16-005.shtml


 >I did receive a reply from Jenny Randles via another List, and
 >thought that some of you may like to read it:

_______________________________

 >"Hi,

 >Sadly - I think this isnt new. It appears to be a story that has
 >been known about since the l970s.

 >The memo is real enough. I have a copy in my FBI file. Its been
 >discussed in several books and its origin is well understood.

I responded on another List where it appeared.

Silas Newton gave a speech announcing that a saucer had crashed
several years before and that it was bing studied. this speech
was picked up and the information was widely circulated in
March, 1950.

Some people thought it was true.

Actually it was the beginning of a scam by Newton and Leo "Dr.
Gee" GeBauer. The intent was to tap into the money flowing
around oil drilling.

Many wildcatters and others had devices they called "doodlebugs"
which, they claimed, helped them to loate oil. These devices
were, of course, all manmade.

Newton and GeBauer had an idea: let's claim we have a doodlebug
based on ET technology. So they started telling people the story
of a crashed disc and their discovery of a "doodlebug" based on
the alien technology.

This story became the basis for a 1950 book by Frank Scully.
Scully's book was thoroughly "debunked" in the early fifties by
an invesigative reporter. I don't recall all the details now.

I should point out that I was the first person outside the FBI
to see that document. It was in the collection of FBI documents
I received in 1977 (I was the first person to ask the FBI under
the FOIPA).

Naturally I was surprised when I first saw it.

The initial release had the source of the information ("an
invesigator for th Air Forces") blacked out. However, some
checking by me and others showed that the document was evidently
was a reaction fo Newton's speech.

The most important thing about it is that it caused Hoover to
formally ask the Air Force, "just what do they think about
flying saucers."

This is all described in 'The UFO Fbi Connection'.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:55:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:07:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:57:10 -0500

<snip>

 >>If they don't have any bodies, how many times do they have to
 >>say it before you at least accept it as a _possible_ likelihood?
 >>Or maybe we should put it this way: How can the AF prove to
 >>Jerry Clark that no alien bodies were recovered at Roswell?
 >>Answer? They can't.

 >This is a question, or similar to a question, that I have asked
 >myself since the time of Condon. How could Condon, or the Air
 >Force, prove to me that UFOs are not extraterrestrial craft (as
 >if that was the pressing problem they faced)?

 >The answer is if the investigation was an honest one.

The bottom line is honest explanation. If all sightings could
have been explained with each explanation being honestly correct
or at least convincing there would be no mainline ufology (there
still might be "dreamers" who don't need confirmed sightings in
order to believe in ET's or spirits or whatever).

The problem the Air Force had since day one (June 25, 1947, when
Arnold's sighting was publicized) was the failure to provide
correct, or at least convincing, honest (as opposed to
deceptive) explanations. NOTE: you may not know, after all
investigation is complete, whether or not a particular
explanation is correct. But an educated investigator can make a
good decision as to whether or not, in the context of a
particular sighting, a particular explanation is convincing or
at least reasonable.

Skeptic/debunker/scoffers have offered explanations for
sightings. When I discovered that many or most of these
explanations are unconvincing at best and in som cases simply
provably wrong, then I became skeptical of the skeptics!

Debunking Rule #1: Any explanation is better than none!

And here we get into the intellectual dishonesty: Yes, Menzel
had access to information that proved Arnold didn't see water
drops on his windshield. Yet, in his last book Menzel proposed
his (fifth) explanation for the Arnold sighting: water drops on
his windshield. Was this an "honest" explanation? It certainly
was not just unconvincing, it was wrong.

The Air Force listed as "explained" the Rogue River sighting:
"kites." (see my web page entry that has been discussed in
previous posts) This is the public identification. Privately,
during the Battelle study in 1952-53, the Rogue River sighting
was considered one of the 12 best. from 1947 through 1952. Where
is the honesty?

When the results of the special project leading to Special
Report #14 were announced the press in 1955, the release did not
mention that roughly 20% of the sightings had been left
unexplained. It only mentioned the few percent remaining
unexplained in the years following the report.

Condon's summary chapter of the Condon report, the portion that
most journalists read (they couldn't hack the remainder), stated
that nothing of value had come from the study of UFO sightings.
IT did not mention that roughly 1/3 of the sightings were left
unexplained. The AIAA UFO subcommittee used this very fact to
contradict Condon's claim that there was nothing to be learned
by further invesigation.

Referring to the McMinnville case in the Condon report, Condon
stated that a photoanalyst, (Everitt Merrit of RCA) had said the
Trent photos were not worthy of *photogrammetric* analysis. Deep
inside the report we find the section written by William
Hartmann in which he describes his *photometric* study that led
him to conclude that the photos were probably real.

Photogrammetry: the measurement of spacings of various features
in a photograph with the intent to use these measurements to
determine actual spacings, distances, etc. of objects that
appear in the photo photometry: the measurement of relative
photographic "brightnesses" (grey levels) with the intent to
calculate the amount of light rediated by objects in the photos.

Brightness is independent of distance or size. Hence
photogrammetry does not equal photometry.

I am positive that Condon knew the difference. I am positive he
knew that photometric measurements could be made even if
photogrammetric measurements "could not."

Nevertheless, he attempted to "cover up" Hartmann's positive
result by stating Merritt's claim that the photos were too fuzzy
for worthwhile photogrammetric analysis. (Reporters who never
made it past Condon's summary would not have known what Hartmann
wrote.)

In the early 1950's Dr. Urner Liddel of the Naval Research
Laboratory went public with his explanation of flying saucer
sightings: high altitude (Skyhook) balloons.

He did not mention the sightings by the men who launched the
balloons, the men who saw unidentified objects flying near their
balloons.

The Project Twinkle report and later Ruppelt covered up
(apparently) the triangulation accomplished in April, 1950, when
missile tracking stations at White Sands successfully determined
the altitude and size of unknown objects flying at 150,000 ft
(30 ft in diameter).

Project Grudge, Ruppelt and the Air Force (and the Army) did not
report on the successful triangulations by Army personel of
unidentified objects at Ft, Hood in Texas (1949).

All during the time of Project Sign, Grudge, Blue Book the Air
Force gave the public impression that research was being done
and answers were being found and all sightings could be
explained. Was this true?

No.

The Air Force adopted many "garbage" explanations.

Had the Air Force been able to provide honest and convincing
explanations we wouldn't be here now.

So Kevin has it exactly right. Had the Air Force carried out
honest invesigations and if these invesigations had resulted in
honestly convincing explanations, then we would not be
discussing UFO sightings as potential evidence of ET's or
whatever (NHI - nonhuman intelligence).

As for Roswell, the Air Force invesigation is an insult to the
intelligence.

For comments on Cavitt's testimony, which was a key part of the
first Air Force report on Roswell see 'Cavitt Emptor' at:

http://brumac.8k.com

And of course the "dummy drop" theory of Roswell went over like
a lead Skyhook balloon.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:55:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:08:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:33:33 -0500

<snip>

 >But since you like Zamora, here's another quote re same for you:

 >"Maj. Hector Quintanilla, Jr., Project Blue Book Director, took
 >a special interest in the case. He was convinced that Zamora had
 >told the truth about what he had seen, and that it was not a
 >hoax. Writing in Studies in Intelligence.

 >In 1967, Quintanilla summarized the sighting:

 >'Diagnosis: Unsolved. There is no doubt that Lonnie Zamora saw
 >an object which left quite an impression on him. There is also
 >no question about Zamora's reliability. He is a serious police
 >officer, a pillar of his church, and a man well versed in
 >recognizing air-borne vehicles in his area. He is puzzled by
 >what he saw, and frankly, so are we.'" And so on.

 >Nothing to sue about there.

 >And where did I stumble across this? On page 272 of Bruce
 >Maccabee's UFO FBI Connection: The Secret [sic] History of the
 >Government's Cover-Up.


Nice to know my book was worthwhile source of information.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:03:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:14:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:41:43 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:07:12 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>And what happened when an imaging telescope in Hawaii in 1995
 >>got video of a strange set of lights moving through the night
 >>sky? Did they immediately run to the ufologists and say "what is
 >>this?" or "Wow, look what we got?". No. The video was "leaked"
 >>to Nightline which took 6 months to decide to use it on the
 >>night that the INDEPENDENCE DAY move was to open. One month
 >>before that they had contacted me about it... after having the
 >>video for about 5 months...and they wanted an "on camera"
 >>instantaneous analysis (would not let me see it before they
 >>videotaped me for the show). This was all described in a paper I
 >>wrote for the MUFON Journal (Nightline UFO) in late 1996.

 >I'd like to see this case analysis.

See below:



The Nightline Ufo Video No Longer A Question Mark

by

Bruce Maccabee

Late in June I received a call from Jay LaMonica, the producer
of ABC's "Nightline" show which is hosted by Ted Koppel. He
called to tell me that he had a video of some strange lights
that had been recorded by a special "GEODS" telescope system on
Mt. Haleakala which is on the Island of Mauai in Hawaii. He
wondered if I would be willing to analyze it. He said there were
three bright lights which crossed the field of view and that
initially it was thought these were lights on an airplane, but
then the people who first saw the video noticed that star images
passed between the lights without blinking so they thought that
perhaps it wasn't a plane after all. Sometime, he didn't say
when, after the video was first seen in early December, 1993,
someone, he wouldn't say who, had passed along a copy of the
unclassified video to ABC.

Jay went on to say that Nightline was going to do a show on UFOs
and SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Life) and he wondered if I
would be willing to appear in the show. I said "sure" and "when
can I see the video," or words to that effect. He responded that
I couldn't see the video until the taping of my segment because
he wanted to get my reaction to seeing the video for the first
time. I was a bit irked at that because I knew he would be
asking me to base a conclusion on "instantaneous analysis,"
hardly a scientific way to approach the situation. Since I
couldn't see the video I asked him for as many details as he
knew. He did not know much. He said it took several seconds for
the lights to cross the field of view which he thought was about
2 degrees. He also said that the telescope was pointed at or
near the horizon. I asked for the name of a person to call so I
could learn more details, but he wouldn't give me a name. I
therefore asked him to recontact his source and find out
everything he could about the telescope and where it was
pointed.

We had some difficulty in setting up the exact date and time for
the interview. In subsequent conversations, as we tried to
specify the interview date, Jay told me that he had contacted
someone involved with the project which took the video. He now
believed that the field of view was probably 5 1/2 degrees
rather than the originally mentioned value of 2 degrees, but he
couldn't be certain because there are several telescopes on
Mauai and he didn't know which one had taken the video.

The big day came over a week later, on July 11, 1996. I arrived
at the ABC studio in Washington. D.C. equipped with a ruler, a
calculator and a pad of paper. Although I had only sparse
information I was determined to do the best analysis I could
under the circumstances. From what Jay had told me I knew I
would be able to estimate the angular velocity and angular
spacing of the lights. Knowledge of these angular quantities
might allow me to reject, or at least set limits on, the various
potential explanations.

As soon as the camera crew set up the TV monitor and video
machine I began running the video over and over. Text at the
beginning of the video stated that it was taken by a GEODS
telescope during the year 1993 on day 335 at 032444Z (335th day
of the year, December 1, at Greenwich Mean Time of 3:22:24 AM
which corresponds to 5:22:24 PM, November 30 in Hawaii). I
determined that it took almost exactly 3 seconds for the lights
to cross the FOV, from left to right, in a straight line tilted
slightly upward. This corresponded to an angular rate of 1.83
degrees/sec or 0.032 rad/sec. (Note: 1 degree = 0.0174 radians
or 0.0174 rad. Multiply the angle in rad or the angular rate in
rad/sec by the distance to get size or speed as measured
perpendicular to the line of sight.) There were three lights,
equally spaced and traveling in parallel with the central light
a bit ahead of the lights above and below. I measured the length
of the image of each bright light and found it corresponded to
an angular size of about 0.005 rad while the angular spacing
between the upper and lower lights was about 0.01 rad. Close to
the central bright light were two much fainter lights, one above
and one below. Hence there were a total of five lights (3
strong, 2 weak) traveling through the FOV of the telescope. If I
had known the distance to the lights I could have calculated the
actual size and velocity (perpendicular to the line of sight)
from the measurements I had made. Unfortunately there was no way
to determine the distance from the available information.

After watching the video several times and thinking about it I
gained the distinct impression that if the information I had
been given were correct (5.5 degree FOV; telescope pointed at or
close to the horizon), then both the airplane and meteor
hypotheses had problems. The images of the lights were spaced
too far apart to be from an airplane near the horizon unless it
was extremely close to the telescope and had a very large
wingspan, but in this case it would also be traveling very
slowly. On the other hand, if the images were meteors the
angular speed was too low unless they were so far away that they
might be outside the sensible atmosphere, in which case they
wouldn't glow.

Whether either of these potential explanations was correct, or
if neither was, depended upon the actual angle of elevation of
the telescope: was it pointed exactly at the horizon? Was it
pointed 5 or 10 degrees or more above the horizon? Unfortunately
I didn't learn the answer to this important question until many
weeks later.

Dr. Michael Guillen, the science correspondent for ABC TV, was
the interviewer. The first thing I said to him after being
introduced and well before the cameras were "rolling," was "This
is the worst investigation I have ever done." I said that
because I had never before made a public statement about a
potential UFO case without first carrying out an investigation
that at least included talking to the witnesses. (I realized
that no one had actually seen the objects at the time of the
taping since the video had been recorded automatically, but I
knew that someone associated with the project could answer the
technical questions.) I then let Michael wait a bit while I did
some calculations of angular sizes and speeds. At the bottom of
my note pad I wrote "Distance not actually known, nor (angular)
elevation of camera (telescope). Hence can do no more than make
educated guesses."

Michael spent 30 minutes or more trying to get me to identify
the lights. We played the video over and over as we both
watched. The failure of one star image in particular to
disappear when it passed between the upper and middle bright
lights (where the wing of an aircraft would block the star) was
obvious to both of us, as it had been to Jay. This seemed to be
strong evidence that the lights were not connected by an opaque
body, namely, the wing of an airplane. However, I pointed out
that we couldn't be certain because the failure of the star
image to dim very briefly might have been some artifact of the
camera electronics or the recording mechanism about which we
knew next to nothing.

Michael told me that he had shown the video to Dr. Robert
Nathan, formerly of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and a
long-time UFO analyst with whom I have worked on UFO photos and
videos over the last 20 years. Jay and Michael had been rather
surprised when Robert had immediately identified the lights as
meteors without any analysis other than viewing the video. I
told Michael I was suspicious of the meteor explanation (for the
reason given above) but that I could not be sure whether or not
it was correct without knowing the angular elevation of the
telescope. Furthermore, I doubted that a meteor which had broken
into three parts before entering the FOV would have three nearly
equally sized pieces that could travel in parallel at exactly
the same rate and could travel without creating a trail of
burning particles.

Finally, after many minutes of seeming to attempt to "browbeat"
me into making some positive identification (perhaps he hoped I
would claim it was a real UFO), Michael asked me how I video
ranked in terms of credibilty and strangeness and I said that
the video had a high degree of both but that it would have to
remain "a big question mark."

During the evening after I left the ABC station I began the real
investigation. I hoped to have a definite answer before the
video was shown nationally on Nightline. Unfortunately, that was
not to be.

After a more careful theoretical analysis I was able to put more
specific restrictions on the potential explanations. It became
apparent that if the telescope were within 10 degrees of the
horizon the meteor hypothesis could explain the angular
velocity, although it still couldn't explain the constant speed
along parallel tracks without any sign of a meteor trail.
Similarly, if the telescope were within 10 degrees of the
horizon the airplane hypothesis was unlikely because the angular
size and angular speed would only be consistent with a very
large aircraft flying (well over 100 ft wingspan) at a very low
speed (100 mph or lower) at a short distance from the telescope
(a mile or less). The upshot of this analysis was that if the
telescope were pointed close to the horizon the suggested
explanations were severely strained if not simply unacceptable.
Hence the possibility that one - or three - or five - UFOs were
involved had to be considered. It all depended upon the angular
elevation of the telescope, which I did not know and which I was
not able to learn before Nightline showed the video on July 16.
.

Because I had to locate the telescope operators by asking for
help from other people it took well over a month to get the
"real data." The crucial information turned out to be far
different from what I had been led to believe. I had been told
by Lamonica that the angular elevation was low, maybe several
degrees ("near the horizon"). However, I learned from the
operators that the actual angular elevation was much greater
and, in fact, was nearly straight up (85 degrees). I also
learned that the telescope was about 10,000 ft above mean sea
level (AMSL).

This put a whole new light on the matter. It took me all of five
minutes (or less) to determine that under this circumstance the
lights could be on an aircraft of some nominal wingspan
traveling at several hundred mph at a reasonable cruising
altitude above the telescope. In fact, any combination of
wingspan, W in ft, speed S in ft/sec and height H in ft AMSL
which obeys the relations S/(H-10,000) = 0.032 rad/sec and
W/[H-10,000] = 0.01 rad would work. (Note: since the telescope
is at 10,000 ft AMSL, the assumed H should be no lower than,
say, 11,000 ft. Also, the assumed H should be no greater than
45,000 ft which is an upper altitude for typical aircraft). For
example, if H = 20,000 ft AMSL the wingspan could be W = 0.01
(20,000 - 10,000) = 100 ft and the speed could be S = 0.032
(20,000 - 10,000) = 320 ft/sec or 220 mph. Similarly, the video
would be consistent with a plane having a wingspan of W = 40 ft
and a speed of S = 128 ft/sec = 87 mph providing it were flying
only about 4,000 ft above the telescope at H = 14,000 ft AMSL.
Naturally there are many (an infinite) number of possible
combinations of W,S and H that would satisfy the requirements of
the video.

The telescope operators told me that, upon seeing the video,
they had immediately suspected that it was an airplane, but then
they questioned that explanation because they rarefly, if ever,
see an airplane overflying the telescope installation. One of
the men called the FAA to find out if there was any record of an
airplane scheduled to fly over Mt. Haleakala at the time of the
video. He was told there was no such record (no air route passes
over the mountain). Of course, an aircraft could have flown over
the mountain without the FAA having a record of its exact flight
path.

One aspect of the imagery seemed to directly contradict the
airplane hypothesis: at one time a star image appears to pass
"through" the space between the bright central lights and the
upper "wing" light. This had been pointed out to me by Lamonica
as evidence against the aircraft hypothesis because one would
expect the star to be momentarily blocked by a solid wing. When
I first saw the video I wondered whether or not that could be
explained as an artifact of the electronics. Subsequently I
learned from the telescope operators that the nature of the
image forming and capturing electronics (RCA ISIT microchannel
plate and image scan device - like a vidicon - plus a scan
convertor to make an ordinary VHS video) could have failed to
record the brief "turning off" of the star image because of time
delay (integration time) in the processing devices.

CONCLUSION:

A UFO is as a UFO does. If a UFO does nothing that an IFO
(identified flying object) could not do, then there is no reason
to call it a UFO. In this case it appears that an airplane would
be consistent with the observational evidence. Although I can
not prove there was an airplane flying over the telescope, there
is no reason to believe that an airplane could not have done so.
Since there is no evidence in the video which conclusively
contradicts the airplane hypothesis there is no good reason to
claim that the lights were something else.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                Puerto Rico: Fear and Loathing in Barceloneta

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:58:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:28:35 -0400
Subject: Puerto Rico: Fear and Loathing in Barceloneta


Fear and Loathing in Barceloneta


A "Bloodthirsty" Bird Swallows Chickens
By Pity Rivera
EL EXPRESSO newspaper
Year 6- Number 250
Week of Mayl 3 to 9, 2001


BARCELONETA --  A startling case has maintained an atmosphere of
fear, doubt and wonderment in Barceloneta's Barrio Garrochales
and the Pozo Gratis sector.

According to eyewitness accounts and a direct visit made by this
photojournalist, the case merits an official visit and
investigation by functionaries from the Department of Natural
Resources.

Luis Prez, a local resident, witnessed the manner in which a
very strange bird swallowed and regurgitated several of his
chickens. The capture of such a bird ought to represent a
priority for the Natural Resources department, but such an event
had not yet occured as to the close of  EL EXPRESSO's weekly
edition.

The bird which has spread fear among residents of several
Barceloneta communities measures approximately 30 inches in
length and 12" in height, and has a long, thick neck. Its beak
measures approximately four inches and is of a strong texture.
Its plumage is grey, black and white, has no claws, but with
feet similar to those of a chicken. It's legs are similar to
those of a cat, and it feeds on blood. Prez  states that his
nephew Emiliano Machado Prez and other neighbors took upon
themselves the task of monitoring the pen in which the fighting
roosters were kept due to the fact that chickens appeared to be
missing every day. Last week, in early morning hours, while they
nervously guarded their premises, they managed to see the
strange bird and were able to see it swallowing some of the
chickens alive--feathers and all.

A Sort of Chupacabras?

The locals state that they were stunned when ten minutes after
swallowing them, the bird regurgitated them as a chewed up,
featherless and bloodless mass.

Despite their fear, they decided to capture the odd bird. It was
thus that on the following morning they armed themseves with
courage and one of the residents caught the predator by the neck
and locked it in a common cage. A neighbor phoned this reporter
for EL EXPRESO and the phenomenon was confirmed on site.

Photos were taken and we recorded the story told by Don Luis and
his neighbors. Another peculiar detail is that the strange
creature appears to have a tail that prodtrudes from its head
and measures approximately eight inches.

Given the bird's strange and unique nature, this author
consulted the book Birds of Puerto Rico, written by Herbert
Raffaele of Princeton University, 1989 edition, and this bird is
not featured among the native species. It resembles the bird
known as the Booby, but its tail feathers are different.

Nor is it a barn owl, nor a "gallareta" nor a chickenhawk. It
resembles the Royal Yaboa at best, but there are differences,
according to the author of the reference work in question..

Hundreds of curiosity-seekers visited the area, including some
bird hunters. At the time of this writing it is not known if
Natural Resources has taken an interest in the matter in order
to decide the final destination of this strange creature which
has kept residents of Barceloneta on tenterhooks.


#####################################

Translation (C) 2001. S.Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology


Special thanks to Orlando Pla and Lucy Guzman









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

              Cydonian Imperative -05-30-01: The Face - Natural

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:20:12 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative -05-30-01: The Face - Natural


The Cydonian Imperative
5-30-01
Links and illustrations at:
http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html

Cydonian Imperative: The Face -- Natural or Artificial?
by Mac Tonnies


1. The Face: What Is It?

The acquisition of a complete, overhead view of the Face on Mars
is a historic occasion that demands caution and scrutiny.

Since the remarkably detailed new image hit the Net, I've
encountered a great deal of confusion and disillusionment on
behalf of the justifiably curious public as well as from the
self-appointed "experts," who have offered us the predictable
stew of negative sound-bites and extremely little in the way of
actual science. Saying "it's a hill" without recourse to
geological evidence does not make the Face a hill, just as the
finger pointing at the Moon is not the Moon.

Critics have unanimously declared the Face "natural" because the
newly revealed eastern side of the formation is not a perfect
match with the familiar western half, despite the fact that no
Face investigator ever suspected such a match in the first
place. From Mark Carlotto and Mark Kelly's orthorectifications
to Kynthia Lynn's stunning analog models, the relatively
"chaotic" morphology of the eastern half has been amply
demonstrated from the beginning.

Indeed, the variation between halves was made quite clear in
Viking frame 70A13 in 1976. (Richard Hoagland would later use
this image to posit his "feline double-image" hypothesis, which
appears, provocatively enough, more tenable when assessed in
higher resolution.) As demonstrated by Chris Joseph, the Face
retains a remarkable degree of symmetry. "Eye sockets" are
present on both sides, as are the right-angled extensions of the
"framing mesa." (While NASA assures us that symmetrical
rectilinear features appear elsewhere on Mars, the agency has
yet to produce a single image that would defend this unusual
position.) Right angles are extremely rare in nature, and the
Face, whatever it represents, boasts enough of them to warrant
careful archaeological inspection. The Face can be neatly
divided down its centerline (as marked by the unusual "harelip"
feature noticed by Mark Carlotto), confirming the estimated 95+
symmetry of the mesa's base. This figure alone argues
compellingly for artificial origin.

2. The Two Sides of the Face

There is no arguing that the respective sides of the Face are
different, and in this sense I concur somewhat with the
skeptics. The apparently "chaotic" appearance of the eastern
half can be attributed to any of the following factors:

1.) Erosion. The eastern side's relative irregularity may be the
result of wasting and/or wind/water erosion. Lan Fleming has
already offered that the smooth appearance of the Face's eastern
side seems inconsistent with mass wasting as a geological
mechanism. This theory presupposes that the Face was at one
point (perhaps millions of years ago) much more human-like than
it appears now.

2.) Structural decay. If the Face is an intentional sculpture,
the eastern side's irregularity may be due to literal collapse
of the Face's surface, implying a hollow interior. Fine-scale
details detailed by Robert Harrison of Cydonia Quest suggest
this might be a useful scenario in furthering our understanding
of the Face mesa's origins.

3.) Intentional design. If Richard Hoagland's "double image"
model is correct, the "irregularity" noticed may be no such
thing, but an intentional aesthetic element identical to certain
visages carved by the ancient Mayans.

I find the "double-image" possibility well worth pursuing, as
the construction of mile-long sculpture may have necessitated
maximizing resources to include the most possible culturally
significant detail. We suffer a limiting tendency to forget that
the Face, if artificial, may never have been built for "us" at
all, but strictly for the society that built it.

If the "encoded" message of the Cydonia Face references hominids
and felines, as Hoagland boldly ventured ten years ago, then
confirmation may only come after on-site archaeological study.

3. The "Null Hypothesis"

Of course, extreme skeptics will maintain that the options above
are merely attempts to rationalize away the fact the Face is not
"perfect" (i.e. consistently anthropoid). But again, no one
seriously pursuing this enigma ever expected such a thing. The
Face presents a wealth of anomaly just the way it is; there is
no need to invoke wishful speculative models in an attempt to
bury the Artificiality Hypothesis--especially when we finally
have the data Mars anomalists have been clamoring for for
decades.

If the Face is artificial, then we will probably not know for
sure until a manned mission to the Cydonia Mensae region is able
to examine the features in question. The new image has simply
forced us to confront the Face on its own terms; announcements
"confirming" the Artificiality Hypothesis and those relegating
the Face to freak geology are, in my view, premature and betray
the anthropological disorientation we find ourselves confronted
with in our attempt to make sense of potential extraterrestrial
artifacts.

I sincerely hope future efforts to make sense of the Cydonian
enigmas are carried out by proper investigation as opposed to
"science by proclamation," as witnessed by NASA's recent
comments.

end








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                       Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:08:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:29:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:26:47 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:53:45 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited - Sandow

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Corso's FBI Files Revisited
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:59:38 -0700

 >>But as it turns out, Greg's statement wasn't correct. Corso did
 >>play a role in the Cuban Missile crisis and Paul Scott verified
 >>this.

 >I've stayed out of this for a while, but Ed's now repeated this
 >claim so many times I'm going to speak up.

 >I never said Corso played _no_ role in the missile crisis. I
 >never said he didn't leak information to the press, or that
 >there wasn't a newspaper article based on his leaks.

Greg,

Here is what you wrote:

"What Corso said about the Cuban Missile Crisis in the book was
- I'm sorry - nonsense. I was interested in checking what Corso
said, when the book came out. By coincidence, the book (edited
by Harvard historian Ernest May, with whom I took a course when
I was in college) of transcripts of White House discussions
during the Cuban Missile Crisis had just been published. I
compared the two."

What I was trying to correct was your statement that "What Corso
said about the Cuban Missile Crisis in the book was - I'm sorry
- nonsense. "

It wasn't "nonsense" at all but an a true story about how he
thought he influenced the Cuban Missile Crisis. There will be no
notice in history books, nor will Col. Corso's name appear in
any official records but he did what he said he did: break the
story to the press. He may have misinterpreted the importance of
these actions, but Paul Scott verified that Col. Corso was the
source for his articles. His involvement here also indicates
that Corso was in the know and a serious player. If not, how did
he have access to Senators Keating and Feighan, and why would
they trust him, and visit Scott with him if they weren't sure of
his credentials? Why? Because they knew that he was a spook in
good standing with a reputation for having reliable information.
Corso was connected.


 >I said he didn't have the crucial effect that he said he did --
 >his leak to the press didn't force the Kennedy administration to
 >take action. This is clear from two recent histories I've read,
 >one a collection of transcripts of White House discussions
 >during the crisis, the other a detailed history of the NSA,
 >which recounts the NSA's role in the crisis.

Yes he may have overestimated his role.

 >Both sources show that JFK didn't need any prompting from the
 >press. He responded promptly to information developed by the
 >NSA, by the CIA, and from air surveillance.

OK, I can buy this to a certain extent but I don't quite get the
"responded promptly". He didn't tell the public until the Scott
article. Then he responded promptly and told the public.

You can see that all this could have been handled secretly if
the press hadn't forced his hand, can't you? Perhaps Kennedy
would have told us but maybe not.

 >The mere fact that there was a newspaper article doesn't prove
 >that the article was influential.

There were no other articles before Paul Scott ran his
revelations: There were missiles in Cuba capable of reaching US
soil in a few minutes. This was big news and Scott used Corso's
information. Only then did Kennedy tell the public.

 >I challenge Ed to find any
 >reputable history of the Cuban Missile Crisis that states
 >Kennedy was forced or even influenced to take action because of
 >something in a newspaper.

I doubt if we'll find any history books saying anything about
Corso's involvement.

He was a spook. A confidential source.

I can't accept the challenge, but here's the way it happened:

Corso contacts Keating and Feighan with news that the Cubans
have missiles and warheads. They all contact Paul Scott and he
writes an article with this information. Then Kennedy announces
the same information. Maybe it's just a coincidence.

 >If he can't, he's basically making up history, arbitrarily
 >deciding how it must have been, to make Corso look good.

I don't make up history and I was simply trying to clarify what
I know to be true. Paul Scott broke the story and Corso was his
source. Then Kennedy told the nation.

 >The reason I got into this in the first place was to explain how
 >Corso could, no matter how good his intelligence connections,
 >been the pain in the butt the FBI files say he was.

I know! He was a pain in the butt because he was honest and
patriotic, and didn't take any crap.

 >In his book,
 >Corso inflates his role in something utterly uncontroversial,
 >the history of the Cuban missile crisis.

He does not inflate his role but writes what he thinks is the
truth. Maybe Kennedy was about to tell us all, and Corso was
confused by the coincidence. But he did play a major role and
Paul Scott confirms it.

 >He rewrites its history, to make himself look important. If he similarly
 >inflated things when he dealt with the FBI, it's natural that
 >they'd get sick of him.

Corso worked closely with the FBI and other spooks but his main
concern the infiltration of the CIA by the KGB. The FBI denied
such a thing and that's where the problem was. We now know Corso
was correct. The KGB had penetrated the CIA.

 >Once more -- I challenge Ed to produce evidence from a reputable
 >historian that Corso's newspaper article forced or even
 >fluenced JFK to take action.

That's not the point. Corso thought he influenced the course of
the crisis but he may not have. I agree with Corso and you
obviously don't. I can live with that.

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 30

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:19:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:31:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:21 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >It's a matter of trust. The American people by large percentages
 >do not trust their government to tell the truth and they have
 >good reasons for that - lies told in Watergate, POW-MIA's,
 >Iran-Contra, Travelgate, Whitewater, the latest FBI revelations
 >of withholding thousands of documents from both the
 >_prosecutors_ and the defense in the McVeigh case (culminating a
 >long history of FBI dissembling on documents). Hundreds of
 >scandals and controversies. UFO's are just one in a long line.


Brad,

I hear you, and this is a very short list. You could have also
included the radiation experiments on blacks, the Army/CIA
dousing of both soldiers and civilians with LSD, and whoever it
was that conducted the germ warfare experiment by releasing some
sort of agent in the, I think, SF subway.

By the same token, most -- not all -- of those transgressions
were revealed by the government itself (or one of its agencies
or officials), the FBI admission of not having turned over all
the McVeigh documents being but the most recent example.

Yes, we are not a perfect, open democracy.

That said, here's all I suggested about the AF Roswell report:
rather than invite potential lawsuits, they took other action(s)
or avenues re the issue of whether bodies were recovered or not,
as was testified to by certain individuals.

That's all. I didn't write an essay assaying the Roswell Report
as a whole, I didn't defend the AF of any other transgressions
they made, I didn't do anything but suggest the above.

Nothing more, nothing less.

You and Jerry can go as ballistic about it as you want. I don't
care.

All I said was that they probably considered the possibility of
lawsuits in some of their responses. If I'm wrong, so frigging
what?

OK, so they didn't take lawsuits into consideration (although
how you'll prove that I don't pretend to know).

Big deal. You and Jerry win. What do you want as a consolation
prize?

A lifetime membership to the Roswell UFO Museum?

You got it! Sign up and join, and send me the bill. They must be
on top of the truth about Roswell if anyone is. Eh?


Seriously,

Dennis Stacy

PS: Brad, one last thing: Do you believe that alien bodies were
recovered at Roswell? I won't ask any messy questions about
supplying proof of same.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 30

              CCRN News: Circle Report #2 - Aldershot, Ontario,

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:48:35 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:34:10 -0400
Subject: CCRN News: Circle Report #2 - Aldershot, Ontario,


CCCRN NEWS
The E-News Service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

May 30, 2001

_____________________________



Circle Report #2 - Aldershot, Ontario, Canada

Preliminary Report - May 30, 2001

Aldershot, Ontario
May 17, 2001


Report received from Jeffrey Wilson of a single circle in a
field downslope from a railroad track just west of the town of
Aldershot close to Niagara Falls. Specific crop not yet known,
but said to be young and green looking (wheat or barley?), but
reportedly not thought to be grass. Circle said to be clearly
visible and swirled, noticed by a relative of Jeffrey's while
travelling by VIA train on May 17. Further details when
available. The CCCRN Ontario team is hunting it down as we
speak...


____________________________


The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is a non-profit
organization which investigates the crop circle phenomenon and
possibly related phenomena in Canada, creating a liason between
researchers, farmers, the public, the media and scientists in
trying to solve this ongoing enigma


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH NETWORK

Main Office:
Suite 202 - 325 East 14th Avenue
Vancouver, BC  V5T 2M9  Canada
Tel / Fax (Office): 604.731.8522
Tel (Cell): 604.727.1454
E-Mail: psa@direct.ca
Web: http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

Provincial Branches:
http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/contacts.html


� Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                             Re: Talk And Action

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 05:11:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 11:38:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:00:45 -0500
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:21 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>And, Dennis, I would very much appreciate a response to my post.
 >>You've been ignoring my previous responses. These take a lot of
 >>time to research and write and I'm frankly getting quite tired
 >>of the same old arguments getting rehashed and having to be
 >>refuted with the same evidence and argument without any
 >>resolution or even acknowledgment (here I'm referring to your
 >>arguments on why science doesn't recognize UFOs as a legitimate
 >>subject, which I've just refuted for about the 4th or 5th time).


 >Brad,

 >With all due respect, I wasn't aware, until now, that your
 >priorities and deadlines were somehow connected to my personal
 >priorities and deadlines, such as...moving. That's always a fun
 >one, isn't it? Try getting the house you're moving into finished
 >first.


Dear Dennis,

I don't mean to intrude on your moving agonies. But when you
spend so much time responding at length to long posts but
somehow miss mine it hurts my tender feelins. :)

And here you again don't actually respond to the points I made
about your postings about AF honesty/dishonesty in the part of
my post you snipped out, nor do you say anything about the
important point I made that Executive Order 12958 requires
automatic declassification of all "classified information" and
records more than 25 years old and how the AF should begin by
just obeying this administrative law and apply it to UFO records
instead of obstructing and dissembling. Jan Aldrich has found
numerous "withdrawal slips" of 40-50-year-old SECRET and TOP
SECRET UFO documents that have ILLEGALLY been removed by the AF
from National Archives files in apparent violation of EO 12958
and 5 US Code 552 (the FOIA) which require automatic
declassification. Bob Todd was just blatantly lied to and
stonewalled by the AF which refused to turn over the 16
Attachments to the Oct 20, 1969, Bolender Memo that approved the
closure of Project Blue Book nearly 32 years ago (thus coming
under the automatic declassification requirement of EO 12958) -
the AF just lied through its teeth that it didn't have the
attachments and it refused to look for them. Many other examples
can be cited.

Surely the fact the AF is violating the law on automatic
declassification of 25-year-old UFO records is an important
issue that ought to be raised prominently in any Congressional
hearings, and the fact the so-called Disclosure Project is
completely unaware of it or even of the law requiring it is
another indication of its sloppy mishandling of the UFO subject.
And these were the original issues - the Disclosure Project and
Congressional hearings - you commented on earlier in this
thread about "Talk and Action." So it is strange that you don't
comment on this AF illegality that I have been the first person
to ever bring up. It's a novel issue and an important one, I
think. It could give some powerful ammunition to the call for
"disclosure" and solid grounds for an investigation.

Another aspect of EO 12958's legal requirement for automatic
declassification is that it broadly applies to "classified
information" over 25 years old so that includes information held
in the minds of witnesses but not reduced to writing or records.
Hence, Roswell military witnesses should consider themselves
released from their security oaths by EO 12958.

Because my discussion on the AF was in the same message you only
partially answered you can't say it was lost among 4,411
messages in your email backlog; it was right there before you
snipped it out. See my full posting at:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2001/may/m29-017.shtml

Also, surely you realize you can simply click on the highlighted
email address for me or anyone on UFO UpDates and pull up their
whole message history in almost an instant?

 >On top of that, virtually any specific reference material that I
 >might want or need to access is packed away only God knows
 >where. That leaves me largely talking off the top of my
 >head...and we all know how much trouble that can get you into on
 >this List.

 >Yesterday, I briefly thought about tracking down the AF Report
 >on Roswell. I thought about it for about 30 seconds before I
 >realized it would probably take the entire day just to find the
 >damn thing, with no guarantee that it would be found at all.

I know the feeling.

 >As of this moment, I've got 4411 e-mails in my Inbox. Which one
 >or ones of yours would you like a response to? If it's more than
 >three or four months old, it's most likely gone on this end,
 >lost when the Navidad virus corrupted Eudora, denying me access
 >to all the e-mail therein. Windows locks up when you try to run
 >Eudora.

 >I'll get to it/them when I can. Sorry for the delay.

 >I think I can speak for just about about everyone on this List
 >when I say that your opinions and research are highly valued and
 >welcomed. They're indeed a true contribution to the UFO
 >literature and database. So, it's not exactly like your time has
 >been totally wasted on... me.


 >Sincerely,

 >Dennis


Thank you for the kind remarks. Will we see you at the MUFON
meeting in July?

Regards,

Brad








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:57:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:15:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark


 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:44:46 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500

John,

 >>CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
 >>self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
 >>IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
 >>travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
 >>number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
 >>it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
 >>debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
 >>lose.

 >Why do I seem to hear the name "Stanton Friedman" echoing from
 >the hills of Derbyshire? (County in northern England, residence
 >of one Jenny Randles, for the uninitiated)

When this dismal episode was occurring, I tried to dissuade Stan
from pursuing what I considered, and still consider, a rash and
destructive course of action. It is one of ufology's low
moments, and if we are lucky, nothing like it will happen again.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                    Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:13:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:18:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit - Clark


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:38:46 -0500

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:31:28 -0500


Dennis,

 >>When I worked for Fate many years ago, James Oberg threatened to
 >>sue over a critical article on UFO debunkers that David M.
 >>Jacobs wrote in a book we put together (Proceedings of the First
 >>International UFO Congress, Warner Books, 1980). Our publisher
 >>was sufficiently scared that it canceled an intended second
 >>printing of the book. Oberg had no case, but as we all know,
 >>there is no "winning" in a slander suit by the time you've paid
 >>off all the lawyers.

 >>CUFOS and I went through a legal ordeal from the self-same
 >>self-important Gary P. Posner, after I'd written a hard-hitting
 >>IUR editorial on the excesses of CSICOP and its debunking fellow
 >>travelers. Pelicanists love to dish it out, but some of their
 >>number aren't much good at taking it. I guess they figure that
 >>it's better to silence critics than to engage them in rational
 >>debate - a debate that, I suspect, even they must fear they'd
 >>lose.

 >I don't want to make light of what is potentially a very serious
 >situation - which I abhor and object to - but aren't you
 >hammering me on another thread on this List for having the
 >temerity to suggest that the AF might have had potential
 >lawsuits lurking somewhere in the back of its thinking and
 >public wording?

 >Hmmm?

Hmmm indeed. I have read and reread this post in search of your
point, which continues to elude me.

Your post ignores the simple truth - and the issue I am forced
to raise, yet again - that no one has ever sued the AF after
being called a UFO hoaxer and that no evidence exists that fear
of lawsuits affected the AF's bizarre statements about the
Roswell bodies as crash-test dummies.

In any event, the AF has far greater resources with which to
defend itself, in the event of a history-breaking precedent in
which some poor slob tried to sue it after being accused of
hoaxing, than do cash-strapped civilian UFO groups and
researchers.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                         Re: Talk And Action - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 12:37:46 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:21:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Hall


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 16:36:28 -0500

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:23:33 -0500

 >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:35:56 -0000

 >>>Bless Jim, but here's the proverbial rub. Like most of ufology,
 >>>99.9% of his data was in anecdotal form. There is little that a
 >>>scientific investigation of, say, the Father Gill case can do
 >>>after the fact, except to say, "interesting, if true."

 >>Dennis,

 >>Jim McDonald proved what you are saying here to be untrue. By
 >>vigorous investigation he was able to pin down a lot of facts,
 >>check weather conditions, stars and planets, etc., in many
 >>important cases. He searched out additional witnesses and
 >>conducted careful interrogations. Good scientific work.

 >Dick,

 >I hope we're not slipping into semantics here. Maybe I should
 >have worded it this way: There is little that a scientific
 >re-investigation of the Father Gill and many similar cases could
 >add to what Mc Donald (and others) have already said about them.
 >This is, in part, because the anecdotal data of a UFO report
 >typically outweighs any actual instrumentation of same.

Dennis,

No semantics. I am advocating the efficacy of McDonald-type
investigations (no "re-investigation" is needed of the work he
already did). In other words, his type of investigation (a) can
be carried out, and (b) can produce a lot of useful scientific
data bearing on the interpretation of UFO cases.

Instrument worship notwithstanding, human scientists or
technicians operate the instruments and are just as subject to
bias, prejudgment, misinterpretation, etc. as anyone else. Human
beings are "instruments of perception" whose perceptions, under
normal circumstances and barring some pathology, are accepted as
valid.

In controversial cases, some cross-verification is desirable
(instrumented data being especially desirable) but
instrumentation per se in the way you mean it is not essential
to scientific study. Most real "science" takes place in peoples'
heads in the way they frame questions and pursue knowledge;
instruments play a supporting role.

 >By way of another example, what could conceivably be concluded
 >by a re-investigation of, say, the Coyne case that would allow
 >anything to be scientifically concluded that hasn't already been
 >concluded or suggested by ufology? There is nothing there that
 >_physical_ scientists can investigate except witness testimony,
 >which is not the purvey of the physical sciences.

See above. The myth that the crew saw a fireball could be pretty
well destroyed, for example. The physical factors of the motions
of the helicopter could be more rigorously studied. The records
of fuel consumption, flight time, FAA records, etc. could be
exhumed and carefully analyzed. The military records and
documents of the case could be examined for potentially
important details. Not all science is of the idealized "hard"
physical or "laboratory" science variety. In fact, it probably
represents a minority of science in practice. Furthermore, when
it comes to UFOs, most scientists don't even try.

 >You can do a little theorizing with some of the EM-effect cases,
 >but not much, because, once again, in the main, actual
 >instrumentation is missing. Science likes to do stuff, but, for
 >the most part, there is little that you can actually _do_ with
 >the UFO data. You can sort it and turn it into statistics, but
 >you can't do much predictive with it, never mind applied
 >science. The problem is not so much re-investigating old,
 >largely anecdotal data, I think you would agree, as acquiring
 >new data, preferably instrumented on more than one level.

Again, I think you are quite wrong about this and I have, in
fact, detailed in UFOE-II many things that science could and
should be doing. Yes, it would be desirable to try to get more
instrumented data, not to mention an effort to find out what
already is being detected by FAA and others by authorizing open
disclosure and analysis of any and all anomalies that show up.

 >>I know, it doesn't prove ET. But it does prove that we have a
 >>consistent and patterned unexplained phenomenon.

 >It may indicate or suggest, but all it proves is that we have a
 >lot of reports of same. We have a lot of reports of ghosts, too,
 >but it's damnably difficult to determine what they actually
 >prove.

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. Overall, science has very
little to do with proof.

 >>>Now, let me backtrack. Actually, the world grows more
 >>>electronically wired every day in ways that should let us
 >>>monitor UFO activity as it happens -- assuming the numbers some
 >>>ufologists promulgate. Weather radar, commercial "spy"
 >>>satellites, and so on. Theoretically, UFO sightings should be
 >>>greatly on the increase as a consequence. There are two other
 >>>consequences that need considering in this vein, too. One, as
 >>>the world continues to be increasingly surveilled in all sorts
 >>>of spectra, electromagnetic, visual, etc., the less the power
 >>>any imagined cover up entity could conceivably wield. Two,
 >>>science should be arguably logging this data on their own, w/o
 >>>any reference to present day ufology or UFO wars of the past.
 >>>There is no particular indication that this is happening.

 >>Ah, but there is! I think we've been around this block before,
 >>but your clear position statement allows pertinent comment. You
 >>seem to believe (rather naively, in my opinion) that if
 >>scientific instruments, FAA radar, etc. were picking up UFOs
 >>regularly or even sporadically that the sighters would routinely
 >>make public reports on same. It just doesn't happen that way.
 >>The fear of ridicule by colleagues is a powerful force for
 >>information suppression.

 >I didn't say anything about public reports, if, by public, you
 >mean going to the press and saying, "I'm not sure, but I think I
 >just saw a UFO." What I'm talking about is entirely different.
 >I'm talking about data detected during the daily course of
 >affairs, while looking for something else. This is how sprites
 >were discovered, for example, while monitoring ordinary
 >lightning. This happened by a team of scientific observers
 >"routinely" recording data that went against the grain, not a
 >discovery made by an individual who had to face censure or
 >ridicule from his colleagues. This sort of team activity
 >transpires daily, and in terms of magnitude greater than the
 >sort of civilian surveillance of the atmosphere and near space,
 >visual and otherwise, that took place only a decade or two ago.

If a scientist accidentally detects something UFO-like, he is not
going to rush to colleagues and say "look what I found." He may
privately confide in one or two colleagues whom he knows are not
hostile to UFOs. Others (Maccabee, Sparks...) have covered this
topic well. There is tremendous prejudice against UFOs (read,
"possibly spaceships") as opposed to some relatively innocuous
natural phenomenon. Controversy per se might not stop them, but
this goes beyond mere controversy. UFOs are anathema.

 >The sprite team got data, analyzed it, repeated the process by
 >gathering additional evidence, and then published their findings
 >in a scientific journal. That's how science works. You seem to
 >think scientists are mindless sheep, when the history of
 >scientific breakthroughs (and quite a few failures, too) is
 >littered with maverick personalities, the Kerry guy who
 >discovered how to replicate DNA (for which he won the Nobel
 >Prize), being but a recent prominent example. He tells in his
 >autobiography of meeting an alien disguised as a raccoon. Pretty
 >timid sheep!

 >Again, most scientific monitoring and data collecting is a team,
 >not an individual, affair. Two more recent examples: a team of U
 >of Arizona astrophysicists asked for, and received, classified
 >NORAD data for a study for a study of incoming space objects.
 >The result was a book indicating that they were both larger and
 >more numerous than previously thought. Louis Frank is another,
 >if I have his name right, who analyzed IRAS (?) satellite data
 >and discovered we were being impacted by many more comets
 >annually than previously thought. It now appears he may be
 >right. And guess what? He had to overcome the opposition of
 >numerous colleagues within his field, which he did by getting
 >his data in a row. He got instrumentation which, while it may
 >not have proved his ultimate hypothesis, did eventually cause
 >colleagues to rethink their own positions, including our
 >existing scientific knowledge of how comets "work."

Same answer as above.

 >I admit that scientists are human. But that merely means that
 >for every scientist cowed by the mainstream establishment, there
 >is another looking to make his or her name. Maybe not on a one
 >to one ratio, admittedly, but the mavericks are out there,
 >nonetheless.

Jim McDonald was a maverick, and look what it got him. There are
a few maverick scientists loose in the UFO field today (Bruce
Maccabee comes to mind) but how much help and support do they
get from their colleagues or from scientific funding. Your
analogies do not fit the UFO scenario.

 >>Speculation on my part? Not exactly. Ask anyone who has
 >>investigated UFOs for a long period of time, and they will tell
 >>you of their personal knowledge of many such suppressed cases. I
 >>recall that within the past year or so, several such cases have
 >>been reported belatedly in the MUFON UFO Journal, typically
 >>anonymously by request, but I'm sure Dwight isn't making them
 >>up.

 >Yes, and they'll tell you of their anonymous government
 >informants and highly-placed secret sources, too. Just out of
 >curiosity, how often did McDonald hint of anonymous sources?

I don't know what your first sentence is supposed to mean,
except that it sounds like a guilt by association
pseudo-rebuttal. The people I am talking about are simply UFO
witnesses in aerospace or technical areas whose reports were
suppressed either due to secrecy requirements or fear of
ridicule. Re: Your second sentence, McDonald more than "hinted,"
he reported time after time having audience members come up to
him after his talks at scientific and aerospace facilities and
unburden themselves of personal sightings that they didn't dare
report through conventional or official channels.

I have deleted the rest because your post goes on and on, and
there are only so many hours in the day. If you feel I have
failed to reply to any centrally important point, please let me
know.

Dick









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                           THE WATCHDOG - 05-31-01

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 11:00:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:23:43 -0400
Subject: THE WATCHDOG - 05-31-01



UFOWATCHDOG.COM
"Don't Trip On Your Open Mind"
http://www.ufowatchdog.com

***NEWS*** http://www.ufowatchdog.com/news.html

~ Cryobot Camera Prepares To Hunt ET
~ Red Planet 'To Spark UFO Sightings'
~ Strange Lights in the Sky
~ NASA: No Face - Honest
~ National UFO Wave At Time of Roswell Crash
~ UFO Investigator Probes 'Best Close Encounter' Yet
~ International UFO Research Day - June 24th
~ Unmasking the Face on Mars
~ The Alien in My Freezer

***OF INTEREST***

The Hoax That Won't Die: Updates section now on-line for the
Jonathan Reed Alien Hoax:

http://www.ufowatchdog.com/reedupdates.html

Some morons just don't know when to quit...










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                        Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald . Ledger)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 12:44:37 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:28:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:47:41 +0100

 >Regarding:

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Easton Threatens Lawsuit
 >>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:30:08 -0000

 >It was, after all, Dr Jacqueline Mitton, media spokesperson and
 >Press Officer for the prestigious Royal Astronomical Society who
 >wrote, "your detailed research adds strong weight to the
 >interpretation of Arnold's sighting as birds" and expressed how
 >she would like to inform the British Association for the
 >Advancement of Science.

She sounds to me like another, like yourself who won't bother to
take the time to read serious arguments against the "pelican
theory" and by those more knowlegable that your yourself. Your
refusal to answer questions about your arguments have always
struck me as somewhat childish. Your further contention
regarding the Zamorra case is nothing short of laughable
nonesense.

You've never responded to the wind probablem, the lack of lift
problem on such a small balloon-and now you've got some
nonesense about kids with a balloon fearing a shootout with
Zamora.

Your seeming disregard for fact and some deep need to prove just
one case wrong, your need to denigrate those who disagree with
you rather than prove than continuosly reitterate your "belief"
rather than answering serious questioning of those "beliefs"
makes me suspicious of your motives.

 >That's _the_ Royal Astronomical Society and _the_ British
 >Association for the Advancement of Science.

Yeah, so what? there must be mmore than a few pelicans preening
over that one.

 >Dr Mitton, the Society's spokesperson for the past ten years, is
 >highly knowledgeable about the subject of 'UFOs' and has written
 >a children's book called 'Aliens' (Walker Books) which covers,
 >"UFOs, aliens in fiction, the possibility of life elsewhere in
 >space, and SETI".

Maybe she should restrict herself to the children then and leave
the Arnold case to those more knowledgable.

 >A full length feature on that research and its startling
 >conclusions was scheduled to be published in The Times
 >newspaper. That's _the_ London Times. For reasons I won't go
 >into, it's currently 'pending' and will appear in due course.
 >This is amongst other ongoing publication developments which
 >will be announced in future.

Maybe somebody tipped them off as to how off the wall that
theory is.

 >It was a foremost 'debunker' and highly regarded writer within
 >the 'Skeptical community', who commented on my 'Fortean Times'
 >article, "Don't tell Phil Klass this, but I think that
 >'pelicans' sound MUCH more plausible to me than meteors. Keep up
 >the good work". Along with many other comments from those who
 >were not fanatical about Arnold's 'flying saucers', I've always
 >therefore been aware of the meaningful feedback and an accurate
 >perspective of my case research. The conclusions of course also
 >met with approval from Martin Kottmeyer.

I haven't seen anyone on this List other than you who is a
fanatic about the Arnold sighting. A fanatic is one who spouts
unsupportable theories over and over hoping they will stick by
the strength their repetition, needing to prove at all costs the
rightness of his or her theory for some reason known only to
him/herself.

 >It has occurred to me that Dr Mitton's favourable review is
 >possibly the only instance of a ufologist's research being
 >endorsed by such an august scientific body.

She should be careful there then, because there has been so much
to shoot down this theory that support of it has placed some in
an unenviable position of being smirked at behind a hand. One
wonders if Dr. Mitton is in possession of all of the facts, or
just fed those supporting you position.

 >Subscribers to 'UFO Skeptics' will be aware of significant,
 >continuing developments in the Zamora case.

 >For some years now, a promising lead has been a magazine article
 >which Larry Robinson recalls reading and in a recent list
 >posting (copied here as UFO Skeptics is a public list), he
 >brought this story up to date:

No one but you gives any credibility to Larry Robinson's article
or his take on the Zamora case. It looks to be fiction.

 >Here is what I wrote down. It is NOT a verbatim copy of the
 >magazine account (teenagers tend to abbr.) excepting the quoted
 >parts:

There's where you and Larry go wrong. You accept anything to
support your side whether there is any validity to it or not.

 >A hot air balloon landed, a cop drove up, the pilots thought
 >they'd get jailed for trespassing. Then the cop started hiding
 >behind things. "Our balloon freaked him out." The pilots thought
 >he might shoot it out with them, so they beat it into the sky.
 >Later, we found out he thought he was seeing some sort of space
 >ship."

Other than the fact this theory has been shot down dozens of
time with sound reasoning-the winds were wrong, the "balloon"
too small,the pilots too big, the flames in the wrong place-
where is the military report which should have surfaced after
all of these years which I'm sure the USAF would have trotted
out to squash this particular UFO case.

A lot of unnecessary blather deleted here.

 >In a major breakthrough, I have been able to locate a source
 >which records every known article ever published about hot-air
 >balloons. During the time-frame Larry states and within two of
 >the magazines he recalls reading, there are indeed related
 >features.

 >I have simply ordered copies of all such material published
 >between 1963 and 1967 - a total of ten articles.

 >One way or another, their overall historical content should
 >fundamentally clarify the question of whether our Socorro UFO
 >was merely a hot-air balloon.

As long as it's not a case where since Krakatoa blew up and
disappeared, that proves Atlantis existed.

 >All will hopefully be revealed over the next few days.

I doubt that. We have to consider he source, which to my mind
has little credibility.

 >Again though, whatever criticism has existed about ongoing
 >research published, the focus has never shifted from
 >considerable endeavours to uncover the factual evidence. That's
 >how those pivotal, original 'Rendlesham forest' witness
 >statements were discovered lying in FUFOR's archives and why I
 >was able to ensure they were made available to other
 >researchers.

 >I don't think either Jan Aldrich or Richard Hall have ever quite
 >forgiven me for that.

I'm sure you are in no position to know what Jan or Dick think
or know or feel about anything, however I'll leave that to them.
I note you never respond to my criticizms Jame. Scared of me? I
hope it wasn't me who scared you off this list or was it the
quality of the rest of the debaters here who have given short
shrift you rather juvenial arguements on at least two UFO cases.

 >Anyway, this should all set some matters in their true
context.

Hardly.

 >Having done so, this is my last contribution to 'UFO UpDates'  -
 >I will no longer receive UpDates mail either - as I need to
 >avoid inane distractions from actual research which is being so
 >productive.

Well there you have it. Cuts and runs. We are inane.

I object here Errol. I think the last word should not be
Easton's. Out of courtesy I think he should be privy to the
arguments arising out of his latest faux pas-then cut him off.

 >Join UFO Skeptics or read the list archives at:

Skeptics? I thought you were a debunker. If it's the calibre of
Easton's remarks above, I think I'll pass.


Don Ledger

Shunned by some in the 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 12:25:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:35:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 05:11:00 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:00:45 -0500
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

 >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:21 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >And here you again don't actually respond to the points I made
 >about your postings about AF honesty/dishonesty in the part of
 >my post you snipped out, nor do you say anything about the
 >important point I made that Executive Order 12958 requires
 >automatic declassification of all "classified information" and
 >records more than 25 years old and how the AF should begin by
 >just obeying this administrative law and apply it to UFO records
 >instead of obstructing and dissembling. Jan Aldrich has found
 >numerous "withdrawal slips" of 40-50-year-old SECRET and TOP
 >SECRET UFO documents that have ILLEGALLY been removed by the AF
 >from National Archives files in apparent violation of EO 12958
 >and 5 US Code 552 (the FOIA) which require automatic
 >declassification. Bob Todd was just blatantly lied to and
 >stonewalled by the AF which refused to turn over the 16
 >Attachments to the Oct 20, 1969, Bolender Memo that approved the
 >closure of Project Blue Book nearly 32 years ago (thus coming
 >under the automatic declassification requirement of EO 12958) -
 >the AF just lied through its teeth that it didn't have the
 >attachments and it refused to look for them. Many other examples
 >can be cited.

 >Surely the fact the AF is violating the law on automatic
 >declassification of 25-year-old UFO records is an important
 >issue that ought to be raised prominently in any Congressional
 >hearings, and the fact the so-called Disclosure Project is
 >completely unaware of it or even of the law requiring it is
 >another indication of its sloppy mishandling of the UFO subject.
 >And these were the original issues - the Disclosure Project and
 >Congressional hearings - you commented on earlier in this
 >thread about "Talk and Action." So it is strange that you don't
 >comment on this AF illegality that I have been the first person
 >to ever bring up. It's a novel issue and an important one, I
 >think. It could give some powerful ammunition to the call for
 >"disclosure" and solid grounds for an investigation.


Brad,

I feel that the AF, and, for that matter, any government agency,
ought to follow and abide by any laws on the books. That's what
they're both there for!

Are you aware if anyone has filed an FOIA recently for the
Bolender memo attachments? And if they've been rejected, have
they appealed?

 >Another aspect of EO 12958's legal requirement for automatic
 >declassification is that it broadly applies to "classified
 >information" over 25 years old so that includes information held
 >in the minds of witnesses but not reduced to writing or records.
 >Hence, Roswell military witnesses should consider themselves
 >released from their security oaths by EO 12958.

I could be mistaken about this (no time to look it up), but
didn't Sec. Weaver (?) give or offer immunity to some of the
Roswell witnesses?

I think it was when I was working on that six part UFO series
for Omni that I got a lead that the AF was taking another look
at Roswell. I'd have to locate my notes to determine who I
actually talked to, but it was either McAndrew or his immediate
superior. Whoever, he was not a happy camper about being
questioned about Roswell and eventually hung up on me! So it
isn't like those guys are high on my all-time favorites list.

 >Because my discussion on the AF was in the same message you only
 >partially answered you can't say it was lost among 4,411
 >messages in your email backlog; it was right there before you
 >snipped it out. See my full posting at:

I don't answer every paragraph that everyone posts, and I can
think of few who do. I typically snip long posts and indicate
where I have done so. (And wish more people would do the same.)
It's nothing personal!

 >Also, surely you realize you can simply click on the highlighted
 >email address for me or anyone on UFO UpDates and pull up their
 >whole message history in almost an instant?


Long story, but I'll make it short. I was very familiar with
Eudora. When it got trashed, I switched over to MS Outlook. Call
it Microsoft paranoia, but I don't like to go running through a
program in which I don't know how everything works. Been there,
done that before, and wasted many hours in the process. I knew
you could do that in Eudora, but I knew how to return to where I
was before, too. If it works the same way in Outlook, I'll use
it, and thanks for the tip. Does that mean I can go back to a
chronological listing by clicking on the date received, or will
doing that just list the e-mails for that particular date?

<snip>

 >Thank you for the kind remarks. Will we see you at the MUFON
 >meeting in July?
 >
 >Regards,
 >
 >Brad

Hmmm...haven't made up my mind on that one yet. But if go, I'll 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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                   Re: Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: 31 May 2001 12:27:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:39:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 - Hamilton


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:12:16 EDT
 >Subject: Dr. Eric Walker & MJ-12 [was Re: Debunkers' Guidebook]
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 01:54:20 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:56:44 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook - Young

 >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:29:33 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:20:02 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: Debunkers' Guidebook
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 ><snip>

 >>>>Also fingered by Sarbacher as being involved in briefings at
 >>>>Wright-Patterson was Dr. Eric Walker (President of Penn State
 >>>>University and former head of the Dept. of Electrical
 >>>>Engineering and Dean of Engineering and Architecture). Walker
 >>>>also served as Executive Secretary of the Research and
 >>>>Development Board from 1950 to 1952. The RDB was the brainchild
 >>>>of Bush to continue defense-related research and development and
 >>>>came into being. Lloyd Berkner, another alleged MJ-12 member was
 >>>>Bush's first Executive Secretary (also a member of the CIA's
 >>>>infamous Robertson Panel in 1953).

 >>>I seem to recall that Walker when interviewed in the 80's was
 >>>spouting all kinds of wild conspiracy theories and claims -
 >>>JFK?, Nazis ? I think it's in a Hesemann book.

 >>>>Another member of the RDB who independently named Bush, Berkner,
 >>>>von Neumann, and Walker as either probably or definitely
 >>>>involved was Dr. Fred Darwin, who was the RDB's Executive
 >>>>Director of the Guided Missile Committee from 1949 to 1954.
 >>>>William Steinman interviewed Walker by phone in 1987. According
 >>>>to Steinman's transcript of his phone conversation, Walker
 >>>>initially admitted to attending meetings of the RDB "concerning
 >>>>the military recovery of flying saucers and the bodies of
 >>>>occupants" around 1950. When Steinman brought up the subject of
 >>>>MJ-12, Steinman said Walker's reply was, "Yes, I know of MJ-12.
 >>>>I have known of them for 40 years."

 >>>That would be before Walker served on the RDB in 1950-2. We have
 >>>to rely on Steinman's memory and interpretations since there is
 >>>no transcript and Steinman may have read his own knowledge into
 >>>it.

 >>>>(When pressed for details in letters and other phone
 >>>>conversations, however, Walker clammed up.)

 >>Hello, Brad, David:

 >>The obvious reading of Walker's comments, to me, was that he was
 >>answering Steinman's questions very tongue in cheek. At one
 >>point he told him that he sure doesn't have any aliens in his
 >>office at Penn State. The so called clamming up seems to have
 >>been after Walker realized that he was getting these calls from
 >>somebody without a sense of humor who was quite serious about
 >>his preposterous questions - a real saucer nut.

 >As usual, Bob Young resorts to gross misrepresentation in order
 >to debunk. There were multiple conversations with people other
 >than Steinman, and at no time does Walker talk about "aliens in
 >his closet" with Steinman (that was with somebody else). Walker
 >was clearly quite serious initially with Steinman.

 >I would also like to clear up Brad Sparks suggestion that Walker
 >was spouting all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories in his
 >conversations. I wish Brad wouldn't resort to debunker tactics
 >of trying to discredit people by ridiculing simply because he
 >doesn't believe in the existence of an organization such as
 >MJ-12. The "MJ-12 papers" could all be fakes, yet there could
 >still have existed an MJ-12-type group, whether under that name
 >or something else.

 >Instead, we should be listening carefully to what Walker had to
 >say after being fingered as being involved by Drs. Sarbacher and
 >Darwin, both formerly associated with the Research and
 >Development board around 1950.

 >Furthermore, it is simply not true, as Brad indicates, that
 >there was no transcript of the conversation with Steinman.

 >The following is the actual initial contact conversation between
 >Steinman and Walker. This took place August 30, 1987. Readers
 >can decide for themselves whether Walker was answering Steinman
 >"tongue in cheek" at this point or talking about "aliens in his
 >office" or treated Steinman as if he was asking "preposterous
 >questions."

 >Incidentally, this and following transcripts come from Grant
 >Cameron's and T. Scott Crain's MUFON publication, 'UFOs, MJ-12
 >and the Government'.

<snip>

 From about 1987 to around 1990 I talked with Steinman over the phone
on a weekly basis and we met a few times.  I encouraged him to come
forward and give a public lecture on his findings and answer questions
directed at him which he finally consented to do.

I hosted his last public lecture held in Lancaster, CA even
after he had made the public statement of withdrawing from UFO
research. Bill gave his reasons again for withdrawing from
further research, but I found out later that he was keeping in
touch with one or two people to keep abreast of events.

In several conversations he would tell me of phone calls he made
to various individuals and invariably asked them about MJ-12, a
central theme in his book about the crash at Aztec, NM.  Some
responded as Walker did giving credence to the notion that such
a group existed. Many are quick to dismiss this as they find
flaws in most of the proffered documents or verbal statements.

In my own investigation of crash-retrievals, after working with
Steinman, I would ask the witness if he had heard the term
MJ-12.  Like Steinman a few responded positively though no one
offered anything up in evidence.

Now there are some documents I understand to be "originals" that
are currently being researched for authenticity that mention
MJ-12.  I do not believe the argument is laid to rest as yet.  I
believe that further information on these findings will be
discussed by Dr. Wood at the upcoming July MUFON conference in
California which I am planning to attend.

There is no doubt that trying to navigate through the
testimonies of c/r witnesses and other military witnesses is no
easy task and we have seen how investigators have come to
differing conclusions which indicate that any conclusion is
premature.  To bandy emotional words around such as "rubbish",
"liar", "fake" and other such language compels readers to back
away and not associate with something that can have so many
negative connotations.  Perhaps what they are saying is true,
but then we have to steer through the emotional verbage to find
a logical presentation of the facts, the testimony, the
evidence, and the case for or against.

I believe Steinman to have been a bull dog, charging in where
others feared to go and he was slow to believe something just
because some authoritive figure said it.  I hated to see him go
and file all his notes away in boxes because I felt that anyday
he would have made a breakthrough.

Walker, Sarbacher, and others including the head of JPL were on
Steinman's list to dog until he got an answer, something he
could investigate further. I wish we had more like him, but
alas, in the end, he too gave up for personal reasons (more
personal than you know).

Thats all for now.


Bill Hamilton









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                          Secrecy News -- 05/31/01

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@igc.org>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:42:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:40:42 -0400
Subject: Secrecy News -- 05/31/01


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
May 31, 2001

**US NUCLEAR FORCE STRUCTURE
**CORRUPTION IN SECURITY SERVICES
**DRAFT REPORT ON ECHELON
**AN IRAQI VIEW OF THE IRAN NUCLEAR THREAT


US NUCLEAR FORCE STRUCTURE

Several studies of U.S. nuclear force structure performed for
the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) between 1991 and 1996 have
been partially declassified under the Freedom of Information Act
and published by the Nautilus Institute, a Berkeley-based policy
research organization.

"These force structure studies provide a rare glimpse into the
secret corridors of the nuclear priesthood," according to a
Nautilus introduction.  "As such they are essential for the
public's ability to understand and assess the Bush
Administration's nuclear posture review expected to be completed
in 2001."

A review of the six studies by Nautilus researcher Hans M.
Kristensen found that the military had a predominant influence
on force structure planning.  "It is striking to see in these
documents just how much of STRATCOM's analysis and
recommendations actually became national policy," Mr. Kristensen
said.  "It appears that no one in the civilian part of the
administrations had the expertise to challenge this nuclear
super-command."

Copies of the six declassified studies and Mr. Kristensen's
report, released May 30, can be found here:

http://www.nautilus.org/nukestrat/USA/force/index.html


CORRUPTION IN SECURITY SERVICES

"The problems of crime and corruption are all the more acute
when they directly involve" military and other national security
agencies, said U.S. Ambassador Victor Jackovich.  "This is not
only because these are important pillars of the state. It is
also because these are the very institutions that are charged
with the task of safeguarding the security of everyone else in
the state."

Ambassador Jackovich spoke at the Global Forum on Fighting
Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity at the Hague, Netherlands
on May 29.

Though his remarks were principally directed at the new
democracies of eastern Europe and elsewhere, they are not
without relevance for the United States.

"Government oversight ... over national security, military and
law enforcement agencies must be strengthened...."

"Elected officials should be held accountable to the public
through transparency of their transactions and their acquisition
of personal wealth.... This presupposes an active and objective
media, as well as a vibrant and involved network of citizens
associations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)."

The text of Ambassador Jackovich's speech on "Corruption Within
Security Forces:  A Threat to National Security" is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2001/05/corrupt.html


DRAFT REPORT ON ECHELON

The European Parliament has officially released a slightly
updated draft report, dated 18 May 2001, "on the existence of a
global system for the interception of private and commercial
communications (ECHELON interception system)."

A copy of the latest draft (a 780 kB PDF file) is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/prechelon_en.pdf

The final report is still pending.


AN IRAQI VIEW OF THE IRAN NUCLEAR THREAT

Tehran Radio announced today that Iran had successfully flight
tested a new missile known as the Fateh-110.  The range of the
solid-fueled surface-to-surface missile was not specified.

"We have long-standing concerns about Iran's proliferation
behavior, including its missile development and weapons of mass
destruction programs," said U.S. National Security Council
spokeswoman Mary Ellen Countryman, according to a Reuters
report.

That is one subject of U.S. concern that is shared by Saddam
Hussein's Iraq.

"The growing Iranian nuclear program poses a threat not only to
pan-Arab security but also to the entire Arab existence,"
according to an Iraqi overview of Iran's nuclear program
published this week in the Baghdad newspaper Al-Thawrah.  The
article, translated by the CIA's Foreign Broadcast Information
Service, is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/news/iran/2001/iran-010528.htm

******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of A
merican Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to <majordomo@fas.org>
with this command in the body of the message: subscribe
secrecy_news [your email address]


Secrecy News is archived at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

___________________
Steven Aftergood
Federation of American Scientists
1717 K Street, NW, Suite 209
Washington, DC  20036

voice:(202)546-3300, ext. 191
fax:(202)675-1010
email:saftergood@igc.org
web:http://www.fas.org/sgp/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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                         Re: Talk And Action - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:13:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:48:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Stacy


 >Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:55:38 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>And where did I stumble across this? On page 272 of Bruce
 >>Maccabee's UFO FBI Connection: The Secret [sic] History of the
 >>Government's Cover-Up.

 >Nice to know my book was worthwhile source of information.


Bruce,

My thoughts exactly!

True story: I was packing it away for the move yesterday, and
did one of those things with your thumb where you bend the pages
back and open a book up. It opened at pages 272-273 and there
was Quintanilla's picture staring me in the face.

I read what you had written and it seemed the perfect response
to one of Jerry'y posts. He doesn't put much credence these days
in anything I say, but I thought he might accept it if it came
from you.

Ain't synchronicity grand!

Thanks again!

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                          Disappointed In Brentwood

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:42:52 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:49:12 -0400
Subject: Disappointed In Brentwood


I have waited, apparently in vain, for some encouraging response
to my previous posting suggesting a specific plan whereby anyone
on this list who wishes to take concrete action to encourage
Congressional hearings (an oft-expressed desire) could
meaningfully participate. Except for one or two positive
comments, there has been a deafening silence.

This non-response, of course, can be interepreted in many
different ways. I interpret it to mean that people (in general)
are a lot more willing to sit in their armchairs and spout
opinions and criticize others on this list for "not doing
something" (while claiming that other dubious characters
allegedly are doing something), but these same opinionizers do
nothing but snipe. I say, put your money where your mouths are.

Also, the implication that I have "done nothing" is absolutely
astonishing to me. What appears obvious is that younger
generations are very much into "instant gratification" re: UFO
"truths." Well, youngsters, prepare to be disappointed. Just ask
those of us who were already on the firing line when you were
just a gleam in your father's eye.

There are no easily accessible answers. My advice: Study, think,
learn. As George Santayana said, "Those who do not learn from
history are doomed to repeat it" (pretty close if not an exact
quote).


Dick










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                   Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:06:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:51:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:14:34 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:29:40 -0400
 >Subject: Corso And The Cuban Missile Crisis


 >Someone recently asked what was available that shows JFK and top
 >level officials _knew_ that soviet equipment was being put into
 >Cuba. (in connection with Corso book) I mentioned that people
 >knew about this long before October 15, 1962.

Corso never said that others didn't know about the missiles.
Corso cliamed that he was the person who convinced Paul Scott
and others that some action needed to be taken. He and his
network of former Army spooks thought JFK & staff might
capitulate to the USSR so Corso tried to force their hand. I
admit that he was not involved with the discussions inside the
Whitehouse, and he may even have acted foolishly. What I was
trying to establish was that Corso did do what he said he did.
Do you think Paul Scott would have written the article if he
didn't believe that Corso had something to offer and could be
depended on to deliver reliable information? Would one of the
most trusted political columnists in the nation take the word of
a megalomaniac or a psychopathic liar.


 >If interested I suggest that you go to this web link:

 >http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/03-01.gif

 >Of additional interest see the classification of the document,
 >i.e. Top Secret & Sensitive.

This is a very interesting and important document. I've never
seen it before. Thanks. It ties many things together. Are you
familiar with the significance of "Mongoose"? And of course
there's absolutely no mention of letting the public know!

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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                    Re: Ravaged In The Corn - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 18:59:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:53:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravaged In The Corn - Mortellaro


 >From: William Sawers <syntax@slingshot.co.nz>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ravaged In The Corn
 >Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:00:42 +1200

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 16:28:20 EDT
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Ravaged In The Corn


 >>"Come in she said, I'll give ya, shelter from the storm." All
 >>those who seek shelter on UFO UpDates shall be ravaged in the
 >>corn. And everywhere else on the planet. We continuously
 >>complain of hearing the same old same old from skeptics. Is it
 >>not interesting that we too, we who believe that our experiences
 >>are quite real, say the same old same old. Nothing new.
 >>Something that I have written on this list on a number of
 >>occasions.

 >>There is not one shred of anything new from either camp. And it
 >>shows. Are we complaining that such is due to hearing (and
 >>having to argue) the same old same old on numerous occasions?
 >>That this causes a stagnation within us which precludes making
 >>progress? Or worse, that we are missing the important points of
 >>research by the debate? If so, do what others do. Hit "delete!"

 >>The skeptics... they may say the same of our camp. "Hell, we've
 >>heard nothing new from anyone in their camp and because of that,
 >>we can't prove anything to their contrary!?"

 >>Cop outs.

<snip>

 >Although most of what you say I agree with but will add IMO It's
 >difficult for many to answer to much of what is written on the
 >list by both skeptics and believers. Yes we do have the same old
 >same old as I said in my post that you took umbrage too.

 >Part of the reason IMHO (being very careful here) is that not
 >all of us are as eloquent or have a command of the English
 >language as do many of the prolific posters here do.

Nonesense. First, eloquence has nothing (make that "little") to
do with fact. True, it is often difficult to argue with the
renal blasters here on UpDates, but still, anyone having a
command of the King's (or the Queen's, hey, you never know these
days) English, is entitled to speak. And speak you should. My
problem is that I am frustrated. Not with the BS written as much
as the lack of information provided. But that last statement
requires clarification.

Allow me, please, to defend myself and clarify meaning. Mine.
Much information is trafficked back and forth relative to
various sightings, old mostly. New information. Old information
looked at with new technology, etc. A very great deal of
information and knowledge is passed here on UpDates. But NOTHING
of the firm and absolute information we week on the reality or
lack of reality of the abduction and UFO phenom. Nothing.

Where is the research? With people like Hopkins and Jacobs for
whom I have so much respect? Sure. But only within the framework
of their paradigm, their interest level, their technical
capabilities, which are limited. Limited because not one man may
be a psychologist, physician, physicist, astronomer, et. al.
This phenom requires a multitude of professional disciplines.

 >Is it any wonder that we are getting the same old same old. If
 >any new thinking, or theories are offered out, there are many,
 >very quick, in both camps to jump well and truly on them with
 >disguised venom. or if you prefer glee.

Quite so, Sir. But you and I, all of us have not just the right but
the obligation, to counter, discourse and defend our positions,
even if only in our own ways. Even if the voice in your head is
Gesundt's and not yours. The debate must continue even if only
in tongues.

 >Yea call me paranoid, stoopid even, thats just the sort of bloke
 >I am!

I would never call you stupid, or paranoid. I reserve those
monikers for those who are _only_ culpably stupid.... or
stoopid. As for the paranoid, no. I believe that I referred to
this as paranoid thinking. Hey, even I, the great Morty, and the
other voices in my head, are prone to paranoid thinking. Doesn't
make us paranoid.

Gripple can do that and it's cheap, Chap.

 >"How dare we offer up new theories on the AA" or discuss the
 >"Corso" work without being (often) rudely put well and truly in
 >your place.

 >With a little more tolerance....

 >We _will_ get more posts that definately make you go "sheesh",
 >but there just maybe the odd gem that pops up. Then of course we
 >do have, as you say "the delete button".

 >Also may I ad...... (click!)

 >William (Mortelly wounded)

Nah, Gesundtally reprimanded. There's a definite difference.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                          Re: Ravenna 1966 - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 23:31:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:57:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966 - Rudiak


From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:49:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:47:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Ravenna 1966


 >The human visual perceptual apparatus can process the contextual
 >perspective of an object at relatively close range that flies
 >over an object of known size such as the police car, yielding
 >the distance to both the known and the unknown.

 >It is a dynamic relationship that draws on many different visual
 >cues, aspect angle change, shading, angular velocity and
 >acceleration/deceleration, trajectory projection and
 >perspective, occultation or eclipsing of objects, and even the
 >longer stereoscopic vision baseline formed when one turns one's
 >head to follow a fast-moving object traveling over a large arc.

 >(Instead of the 2-inch separation between eyes which limits the
 >range of stereoscopic vision to about 30 feet, turning one's
 >head by say 90� can create an effective dynamic baseline of
 >perhaps 12 inches or even more, thus extending distance
 >perception out to possibly 180 feet or more; so much for Larry
 >Robinson's constant harping on the supposed 30-foot limitation.)

There are many cues to depth and distance used by the visual
system, both monocular and binocular (as Brad points out). I am
only going to address the binocular or stereoscopic cue, since
the skeptics like Robinson are horribly in error by nearly 2
orders of magnitude. Even though Brad tries to extend the
skeptics' range, he is also greatly in error.

Stereoacuity (ability to detect differences in angular parallax)
in normal individuals tends to be even better than regular
visual acuity (ability to resolve two closely spaced objects,
also as an angular measure).

People with normal visual acuity have resolutions typically from
about 0.7 to 1.0 minutes of arc (or 42 seconds to 60 seconds of
arc), though acuities down to 0.4 minarc (or 24 seconds of arc)
are known. On an eye chart, this would correspond to the more
familiar 20/20 acuity (1 minarc resolution) down to 20/8 acuity
(.4 minarc resolution) (For metric measure people, 20/20
corresponds to 6/6 metric acuity on an eye chart.)

Now to stereoacuity. Stereoacuity is based on the two eyes being separated
and thus having slightly different vantage points. Relative distance (nearer
or further) is determined through triangulation by the brain. Normal eye
separatons for adults are in the 60 mm to 70 mm range (not 2 inches or 50
mm). Calculating the linear range over which stereopsis functions involves
dividing the eye separation by the measured threshold stereoacuity value
(converted to radians).

Here's a section from "Adler's physiology of the eye", 6th
edition, chapter on binocular vision, which gives experimental
results for stereoacuity thresholds:

"Subjects with normal bifoveolar [central vision] binocular
vision have stereoacuity thresholds in the range of 14 to 40
sec. of arc, with an average of 24 sec of arc."

(Actually, as the chapter further points out, if you use very
simple targets like two rods and compare perceived distances,
stereoacuity can be as small as 2 seconds of arc or even 7 times
better. The larger thresholds given above, are for more complex
targets, and thus more normal scenes, so that's what we'll use
in the discussion below.)

Then describing how this translates to linear viewing distance
over which stereopsis functions, we have the following:

"The limiting range of stereoscopic perception is the greatest
distance at which an object can just be detected as nearer than
an object at infinity. It is likely that when secondary cues to
depth are eliminated, stereoacuity is independent of viewing
distance. In practice, however, secondary cues are difficult to
avoid, and as the limiting distance is approached, the relative
importance of these secondary cues increases. Largely on
theoretical grounds, the limiting viewing distance is generallyt
aken to be about 500 meters. Beyond this distance, depth
estimates are based entirely on secondary cues."

Well 500 meters or 1600+ feet is quite a bit more than Larry
Robinsons 30 feet, by over a factor of 50!! Where did Robinson
or other skeptics get their grossly erroneous number? I have no
idea. Maybe a little pelican told them.

(This is just about as bad as Bob Young claiming the policemen
saw a disk shape because they were able resolve the actual disk
of Venus -- that's quite impossible with the naked eye. I've
noticed that when a skeptic criticizes that lack of science in
ufology, same skeptic is almost always pitifully ignorant of
basic scientific principles or simply chooses to ignore them.
End editorial comment.)

Now let's do an actual calculation to see where a figure like
500 m comes from.  Using the 24 sec of arc or 0.4 minarc average
stereoacuity figure and converting it to radians, we get .000116
radians. Now take the lower range of interpupillary distance or
distance between eyes of 6 cm and divide by the stereoacuity in
radians, or 6/.000116. This is about 51000 cm or 500 meters.


What this means, is that an object at about 500 m will cause an
angular separation between images in the two eyes of 24 seconds
of arc (if the distance between eyes is 6 cm). The brain can
actually convert this tiny positional image difference (just
barely) into a relative depth estimate

Somebody with a larger distance between eyes and the same
angular stereoacuity should have a somewhat greater range. E.g.,
if the distance between eyes was 7 cm, the range would extend to
1900 feet. If we used the best stereoacutiy figures of 14
seconds of arc and 7 cm, then the range extends to about 1000
meters or 3300 feet. So in the best case, the range is actually
100 times better than the skeptics 30 feet!

However, as "Adler's physiology of the eye" points out, other
depth cues (like relative object size or image overlay)
interferes somewhat with pure stereoacuity at such distances and
begin to dominate. So the theoretical larger distance is
probably inflated in practice.

Therefore, let's go back to the more typical and operational 500
meter figure to see just what it means. Suppose there was an
object an 500 meters and another one at 1000 meters. Using
binocular disparity cues alone, the brain could deduce that the
500 meter object was closer than the one at 1000 meters. But if
you moved the closer object to 600 meters, the brain could no
longer tell which was closer based on binocular cues, since 600
meters could be beyond the linear stereoacuity limit.

If you move closer then the stereo distance limit, then one can
perceive whether one object is further or closer than another.
E.g., an object at 300 meters will be perceived closer than one
at 400 meters, while another object at 500 meters will be
perceived as further away than the one at 400 meters.

Just for fun, how well do binocular depth cues work at a
Robinsonian distance of 30 feet? Or how much closer (or further)
does one object have to be just detected as closer or further
than another object? If we again use 6 cm interpupillary
distance and an average stereoacuity threshold of 24 seconds of
an arc, it turns out the brain can distinguish the distances of
one object from another at 30 feet if one is about 20 cm or 8
inches closer or further away.

 >If the UFO had been suddenly seen seemingly hovering over the
 >other police car it would have been difficult to tell if it was
 >near or far, but that is a static relationship which does not
 >invoke the array of dynamic visual cues. Here in the Portage
 >County case the UFO traveled at high speed over a large arc.

 >There has been a fruitless argument going on over the UFO
 >Skeptics site about this same phenomenon as perceived from an
 >aircraft.

Brad also raises the rather interesting question of whether
moving objects might extend the range of stereoacuity compared
to static ones. I'm not sure here and am not familiar with any
literature on the subject, but there is probably a good chance
that somebody has looked into the issue (the Air Force, e.g.,
would probably be interested in such perceptual questions for
their pilots.)

However, moving the head to broaden the parallax baseline will
probably not work. For one thing, tracking of moving images
usually involves a complex combination of head and eye movements
to maintain relative stability of the image on the retina. When
sudden, large voluntary eye movements are made, visual
perception is momentarily suppressed to prevent the world from
seeming to swim about as the image races across the retina.

To see what would happen without this inhibitory mechanism, push
on your eyeball with your finger to produce an involuntary eye
movement, and the brain will perceive this as the exterior world
moving instead of your eyeball.


David Rudiak

(Doctor of Optometry, BTW, so I know about this stuff)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                         Re: Talk And Action - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 23:55:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:59:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Talk And Action - Gates



 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:10:56 +0200

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 12:50:16 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Talk And Action
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Kevin wrote:

 >>Yeah, I do think the government is in possession of alien
 >>bodies and alien technology, regardless of the tales told
 >>by some of the Roswell "witnesses."

 >To me, as we (Kevin and I) have discussed off-List the problem
 >is not so much about alien technology (imagine a CD in Roman
 >times, etc. etc.) but about alien biology.

 >If human biologists got even the minimal data about a truly
 >alien biology, I am sure something should have filtered down
 >into our present Biology courses. But I do not find any
 >indications, do you?

Hi Luis,

If we have alien bodies it is highly likely that their existence
is still highly "classified" and only few doctors may have
actually examined them. Kind of like the Corona photo sat
program. Comparatively speaking very few people got a chance to
look at the photos etc, that is until they were declassified and
released to the public.


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 > 2001 >
   May > May 31

                   Bell Admits Some Guest Could Be Frauds

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:27:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:27:45 -0400
Subject: Bell Admits Some Guest Could Be Frauds

http://www.earthchangestv.com/2001_secure/Breaking_News/Printer_Friendly/0527fra
uds.htm

Your One Daily Source for Earth Change News


May 27, 2001

Talk Show Host Admits Some Guest Could Be Frauds

Controversial talk show host Art Bell, often gives his audience
the impression material presented on his show is of a serious
nature and often demands respect from the scientific community.
But now in a recent article Bell admits that some of his guest
are nothing less than scam artist and hoaxers. Bell states
"anything on my show could be true or a hoax".

Radio host Art Bell and some Seattle fans squabble over a local
UFO encounter. By Leah Kohlenberg - Seattle Weekly

LIKE THE LATE-NIGHT RADIO UFO talk show host they admire,
Seattle Art Bell Chat Club members believe aliens are out there.
They just question whether the evidence ever existed in Jonathan
Reed's freezer.

Club members thought they were doing Bell a favor by unearthing
information that one of Reed's supporters, who claims to be a
microbiologist who conducted DNA test on Reed's alien nemesis,
may be employed at a gas station in West Seattle. What the club
members got for their pains was the boot: a request from Bell to
remove his name from their fan club about three weeks ago.

The group complied, adopting the more generic title "Seattle
Chat Club," but "We're hurt," says Philip Lipson, who runs the
Seattle Metaphysical Library, which is perched above a dry
cleaners shop off Broadway and is the site of the club's regular
meetings. "We have always supported Art Bell. We didn't think we
had to believe the stories he broadcast to remain a part of the
club network."

Details of Reed's alleged alien encounter are hardly new and are
widely questioned even within UFO circles. For the uninitiated:
Reed claims he discovered an alien and its obelisk-shaped
spacecraft while hiking in the Cascades in 1996, and that he
killed the alien after it turned his beloved golden retriever,
Suzy, into dust. (See Reed's Web site, www.aliendestiny.com, for
the full story and "photo evidence.") Reed says he then dragged
the body home and threw it in his freezer, where it came alive
again and screamed before it was mysteriously whisked away as
part of a government conspiracy.

Bell, who created Coast to Coast A.M., the phenomenal late-night
radio program about UFOs and the paranormal, has had Reed appear
four times on his show as a featured guest. Since the show
dominates its time slot, 10 p.m. to 3 a.m., in 430 markets
around the country, Reed's appearances have raised his profile
significantly in UFO circles. In the Seattle area, where Bell's
show has its highest ratings in the county, Reed's story raised
great interest and serious questions among local UFOlogists.

In an earnest tone, Charlette LeFevre, the Seattle Chat Club
coordinator, explains her concerns: "Let me explain that I
believe in the existence of UFOs," says LeFevre. "But there were
things about Jonathan's story that just seemed wrong. Hoax
stories like Jonathan's discredit true UFO sightings."

Reed claims he has a Ph.D., but says his records have been
expunged and that he's been shot at and targeted by the same
government officials who lifted his alien. Questions have
recently surfaced about his compatriots, including Robert Raith,
the coauthor of Reed's published account of the encounter, Link:
An Extraterrestrial Odyssey, and Harold Chacon. Chacon appeared
on a recent edition of Bell's show with Reed, claiming he was a
certified microbiologist and that he had examined the alien's
DNA and could confirm it was neither animal nor human. Bell says
he never bothered to check Chacon's credentials.

"He presented himself as a microbiologist," says Bell. "Look,
I'm a radio talk-show host, not an investigative journalist. In
these types of stories, people always claim their records have
been erased or destroyed."

WHEN A MAN claiming to be Raith's roommate strolled into the
Metaphysical Library about a month ago and said Raith's "real
last name" was Aria and that he and Chacon worked at a Chevron
gas station in West Seattle, LeFevre and Lipson decided to check
it out for themselves.

LeFevre contends she called the station and confirmed both
Chacon's and Aria's employment with the manager. They then
visited the gas station, where LeFevre claims she saw Raith
(whom she had met previously) behind the counter.

"When [Raith] saw me, he took off like a chickenshit," she says,
chuckling. "I know it was him."

LeFevre acknowledges that she never saw Chacon in person at the
station. But she received surprising support for her skepticism
when she next brought the matter to the attention of Kathleen
Andersen, a Washington state director of the national Mutual UFO
Network.

"I was floored. . . . [Chacon and Raith] lived down the street
from me four years ago," says Andersen, a former West Seattle
resident. "You could have knocked me over with a feather," she
continues. "I knew both Harold Chacon and Robert--we had dinner
together, and I know they both worked at the Chevron station.
Robert was always talking about writing a science fiction book
about UFOs and people from other dimensions."

When asked by the Weekly if Harold Chacon and Robert Raith were
employed there, the manager of the Chevron station refused to
comment, saying he "didn't want to get involved."

While Reed, Raith, and Chacon were unavailable for comment,
their friend and spokesman, Dan Iaria, did agree to an e-mail
interview. He didn't, however, directly answer the question
about Raith's and Chacon's employment. "Many authors, freelance
writers, and actors take on part-time jobs that are flexible in
order to supplement their income as they struggle to survive.
Again, how is this relevant to Dr. Reed's evidence?" writes
Iaria.

He continues, "Harold Chacon, at the time he began helping Dr.
Reed with the specimen analysis, was a student at Seattle
University. Again, it is not unusual for students to take on
flexible, part-time work to supplement their income while they
complete their education."

One week after the gas station visit, LeFevre got an e-mail and
subsequent phone call from Bell requesting his name be removed
from her group. This is because, LeFevre believes, she's
revealing evidence that one of Bell's best stories might be
false.

Bell denies he has a problem with the club proving or disproving
the credibility of any guests on his show. "I welcome the
Seattle Chat Club to investigate Jonathan Reed," says Bell.
"That's not the issue at all." What did worry him, he said, were
reports that the Seattle chapter, specifically LeFevre and
Lipson, were supposedly "interrogating" people in a "Nazi-like"
fashion.

"I'm not a fan of fan clubs in the first place," says Bell.
"I've never encouraged them, but nevertheless, they've formed
anyway. None of them have a direct legal connection to me. But I
thought the purpose was to allow people to come and speak to
them about these topics, not to use my name to conduct an
investigation."

Bell is understandably sensitive to legal disputes. He returned
this February to Coast to Coast A.M., following a nearly
yearlong hiatus, after pursuing and winning a libel case against
a former FBI agent who accused him of child molestation. The
lawsuit occurred after a schoolteacher actually sexually
assaulted Bell's own son.

The veracity of Reed's claim, says Bell, is unimportant, though
he admits he wouldn't feature a guest who was a proven fraud.
"It's a fascinating story--you don't get many like Jonathan
Reed's, with pictures," says Bell. "But anything on my show
could be true or a hoax. I feel my audiences are adults and can
decide for themselves what to believe."

But LeFevre and Lipson say that, despite the disclaimers, people
look to Art Bell as an authority and that he lends legitimacy to
a story when he features a guest repeatedly on the show.

Doubtful stories like Reed's subsequently tarnish the more
authoritative, scientifically based UFO research, claims
LeFevre. "We will continue to look into the Reed case," she
promises.

email: info@seattleweekly.com