The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Jan 2002

  Jan 1:

   Re: Roswell - Tourist Trap? - Randle - Kevin Randle [80]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [72]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall - Richard Hall [160]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Sean Jones [15]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [13]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Velez - John Velez [55]
   Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods - Velez - John Velez [58]
   Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Ledger - Don Ledger [11]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Ledger - Don Ledger [69]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [28]
   Thank You So Much - Jim Mortellaro [4]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Kimball - Paul Kimball [30]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [34]
   Re: Is Menzel To Be Re-Published? - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [41]
   New Year - Bruce Maccabee [3]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [60]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [80]
   Re: Uninvited White Things On My Lawn - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro
   [31]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Randle - Kevin Randle [161]
   Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods - - Lan Fleming [24]
   Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Velez - John Velez [19]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [84]
   Re: The Roswell Debate - Lawrence Fenwick [31]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - David Rudiak [113]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Clark - Jerome Clark [33]
   'The Missing Times'? - Lan Fleming [6]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [50]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Pflock - Karl Pflock [66]

  Jan 2:

   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [32]
   Re: The Roswell Debate - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [82]
   My Name Is Sue... How Do You Do? - Jim Mortellaro [33]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [38]
   Re: Dead Aliens - Cameron - Cory Cameron [43]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [65]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg - James Oberg [49]
   Fields of Dreams: Colin Andrews, January 2, 2002 - Paul Anderson [72]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Gates - Robert Gates [63]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Gates - Robert Gates [61]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Gates - Robert Gates [63]
   Archive News - UFO UpDates - Toronto [14]

  Jan 1:

   Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS - Bruce Maccabee [4]

  Jan 2:

   Re: Bottom Line on Walter Haut - Gates - Robert Gates [55]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates - Robert Gates [35]
   Re: Bottom Line On Walter Haut - Gates - Robert Gates [37]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [107]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [73]
   Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Henry - Joel Henry [19]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Randle - Kevin Randle [181]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Randle - Kevin Randle [61]
   Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Velez - John Velez [34]
   Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Deschamps - Michel M. Deschamps [14]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman - Stan Friedman [83]
   Walter Haut In His Own Words - Karl Pflock [66]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [24]
   Re: The Roswell Debate - Meiners - Jean Meiners [47]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Clark - Jerome Clark [45]
   Need A Number And A 'How Long?' - John Velez [7]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg - James Oberg [43]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [35]
   Roswell 'Threads' - Neil Morris [66]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Felder - Bobbie Felder [47]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - John Hayes [228]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [55]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [72]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Velez - John Velez [83]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [30]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Velez - John [19]

  Jan 3:

   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Kevin Randle [140]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg - James Oberg [18]
   Filer's Files #01 - 2002 - George A. Filer [453]
   Secrecy News -- 01/02/02 - Steven Aftergood [169]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [88]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman - Stan Friedman [161]
   Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Fleming - Lan Fleming [17]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - David Rudiak [323]
   Re: The Roswell Debate - Fenwick - Lawrence Fenwick [15]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [43]
   UK MoD Established Secret UFO Investigation Group - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [39]
   BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - UFO UpDates - Toronto [50]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [15]
   Re: Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [11]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Gates - Robert Gates [112]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Cydonian Imperative: - 01-03-02 'Crowned Face' - Mac Tonnies [23]
   Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly - Christopher Kelly [79]
   Nick Pope's Weird World - Dec/Jan 01/02 - Georgina Bruni [146]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [30]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [47]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [40]
   Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Ledger - Don Ledger [62]
   NIDS: Report On Montana Mutilation - Colm Kelleher [105]
   Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Rimmer - John Rimmer [82]

  Jan 4:

   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Rimmer - John Rimmer [20]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [15]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [55]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [40]
   Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [18]
   Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [6]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [44]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [62]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [23]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates - Robert Gates [59]
   Re: he Roswell Debate - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   Thank You - Jim Mortellaro [14]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Gates - Robert Gates [136]
   Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly - Christopher Kelly [197]
   Signs of Life: On the Lookout for Extraterrestrial - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [196]
   Much More Mothman - UFO UpDates - Toronto [12]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [49]
   Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall - Richard Hall [33]
   Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron - Grant Cameron [52]
   'UFO/FBI Connection' Now Texbook - Bruce Maccabee [7]
   More Montana Mutilations - UFO UpDates - Toronto [152]
   British MOD UFO Study - Dave Clarke [108]
   Re: Roswell 'Threads' - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [44]
   Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Friedman - Stan Friedman [57]

  Jan 5:

   Secrecy News - 01/04/02 - Steven Aftergood [108]
   Re: More Montana Mutilations - Jean Meiners [31]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [25]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [41]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [31]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman - Stan Friedman [71]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Pflock - Karl Pflock [9]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [17]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Randle - Kevin Randle [42]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [30]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - David Rudiak [57]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Hatch - Larry Hatch [36]

  Jan 6:

   Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Re: Report On Montana Mutilation - Sanchez-Ocejo - Virgilio
   Sanchez-Ocejo [49]
   Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession' Video - Alfred Lehmberg [76]
   Translators Needed - John Velez [39]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - David Rudiak [78]

  Jan 7:

   Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Rudiak - David Rudiak [96]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - Dennis Stacy [27]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Gates - Robert Gates [51]
   Translators Still Needed - John Velez [47]
   Italian UFO Newsflash No. 339 - Edoardo Russo [104]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [52]
   Eras News: Weekly Briefing 01-07-02 - Paul Anderson [38]
   Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg
   [43]
   Re: 'Little Green Men' - Gonzalez - Luis R. Gonzalez [21]

  Jan 8:

   Death Bed Corn Session a Hoax - Jim Mortellaro [5]
   Re: 'Little Green Men' - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [63]
   Re: 'Little Green Men' - Benson - Tom Benson [28]
   Translators Still Needed - 01-07-02 - John Velez [56]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Fleming - Lan Fleming [23]
   SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It' - David Furlotte [73]
   CE3 Producer Dies - John. W. Auchettl [31]
   Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - John. W. Auchettl [51]
   UFO Sightings Up In Malaysia - UFO UpDates - Toronto [50]
   Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - UFO UpDates - Toronto [29]

  Jan 9:

   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Parmentier - Francois Parmentier
   [30]
   Re: SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro
   [40]
   Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - McCoy - GT McCoy [55]
   Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object - UFO UpDates - Toronto [22]
   Dead Lawyers Society, Or... - Richard Hall [27]
   Secrecy News -- 01/08/02 - Steven Aftergood [123]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [67]
   Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak - David Rudiak [57]
   New Mac Tonnies Story OnLine - Mac Tonnies [4]
   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Hatch - Larry Hatch [38]
   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [70]
   Re: Dead Lawyers Society, Or... - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [53]
   Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - Meiners - Jean Meiners [17]

  Jan 10:

   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [67]
   Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object - - Bruce Maccabee [24]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 2 - John Hayes [503]
   NASA's Future Role In Space? - Grant Cameron [51]
   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Chalker - Bill Chalker [36]
   Lorraine Mafi-Williams Aboriginal - Bill Chalker [104]
   EW: Vatican Astronomer Admits Possibility Of ET - Kurt Jonach [57]
   'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders - UFO UpDates - Toronto [67]
   Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders - Rotstan - Karl Rotstan [83]
   Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object - - Larry Hatch [31]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark - Jerome Clark [22]
   Re: Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders - - Bill Hamilton [43]
   Filer's Files - #02 - 2002 - George A. Filer [494]
   Secrecy News -- 01/10/02 - Steven Aftergood [83]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez - John Velez [35]
   Info On UFO Reseacher? - A. J. Gevaerd [9]

  Jan 11:

   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Cameron - Grant Cameron [60]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [19]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Young - Kenny Young [49]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [80]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Friedman - Stan Friedman [40]
   Cydonian Imperative: 01-10-02 New Evidence Of - Mac Tonnies [45]
   Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [46]
   Re: Translators Still Needed - Latest - John Velez [54]
   Secrecy News -- 01/11/02 - Steven Aftergood [90]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [38]
   Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate - Grant Cameron [28]

  Jan 12:

   For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [208]
   NASA & Gravity-Powered Spaceships - SMiles Lewis [19]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Lan Fleming [20]
   Kinross Incident? - Don Ledger [37]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Don Ledger [37]
   Re: Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [11]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [65]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [208]

  Jan 13:

   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [236]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - James Oberg [14]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Gates - Robert Gates [30]
   Rods! - Bruce Maccabee [9]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy - GT McCoy [64]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? - Robert Boreham [19]
   What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - UFO UpDates - Toronto [73]
   What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II - UFO UpDates - Toronto [196]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Alfred Lehmberg
   [52]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Lan Fleming [29]
   Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [85]
   Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Fleming - Lan Fleming [22]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Carey - Tom Carey [104]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? - - Serge Salvaille [44]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [212]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Jim Mortellaro
   [34]
   Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs - - Don Ledger [31]

  Jan 14:

   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [174]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [68]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [42]
   Re: Bruni On James Whale Show - UK - Georgina Bruni [3]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman - Stan Friedman [60]
   Bruni On James Whale Show - UK - Georgina Bruni [3]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? - Ledger - Don Ledger [67]
   Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Friedman - Stan Friedman [48]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [39]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [25]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps - Michel M. Deschamps [28]
   Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez - John Velez [87]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [33]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [69]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Chapman - Charles Chapman [96]
   Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - Oberg - James Oberg [42]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [70]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [38]

  Jan 15:

   Alfred's Odd Observation #004 - Alfred Lehmberg [109]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [200]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [36]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy - GT McCoy [67]
   CCCRN News: Report & Media Archive Updates New - Paul Anderson [59]
   Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.14.02 - Paul Anderson [59]
   Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II - Velez - John Velez [82]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy - GT McCoy [67]
   Ann Druffel Book - John Hayes [25]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [146]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [48]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [79]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger - Don Ledger [36]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [221]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Carey - Tom Carey [91]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Carey - Tom Carey [44]
   Still Looking For Marshall Lee - A. J. Gevaerd [9]

  Jan 16:

   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [147]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [117]
   Public Memo To James Oberg - Moderator UFO UpDates [87]
   Secrecy News -- 01/15/02 - Steven Aftergood [139]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [85]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps - Michel M. Deschamps [34]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger - Don Ledger [41]
   Italian UFO Newsflash No. 340 - Edoardo Russo [86]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [48]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [130]
   PsyOps Again - UFO UpDates - Toronto [73]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [47]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy - GT McCoy [72]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez - John Velez [37]

  Jan 17:

   Filer's Files - 03-2002 - George A. Filer [490]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [26]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 3 - John Hayes [240]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [82]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [51]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [68]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Cameron - Grant Cameron [35]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [373]
   'Debunker' Takes Aim at Cydonian Imperative - Mac Tonnies [18]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [142]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [116]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Oberg - James Oberg [13]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger - Don Ledger [31]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez - John Velez [75]
   Bizarre Creature in Idaho Raises Prospects for - Nick Balaskas [9]
   Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - John Velez [71]

  Jan 18:

   Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Stephen Bassett [59]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [40]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [19]
   UFO & Strange Creature In Chile - Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [97]
   Secrecy News -- 01/17/02 - Steven Aftergood [108]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gates - Robert Gates [52]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [34]
   Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [87]
   A Short Real Story - A. J. Gevaerd [369]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [58]
   Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Jonach - Kurt Jonach [31]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [439]
   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [28]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [189]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Velez - John Velez [85]

  Jan 19:

   Roswell - The Tourist Trap - Steve Owens [38]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [28]
   Kinross Incident And Gas Relases - GT McCoy [8]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [40]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Hatch - Larry Hatch [75]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman - Stan Friedman [86]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [423]
   Re: Kinross Incident And Gas Relases - Ledger - Don Ledger [19]
   Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Bassett - Stephen Bassett [71]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [102]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Friedman - Stan Friedman [53]

  Jan 20:

   Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Jim Mortellaro [52]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [26]
   Fwd: Are You Ready For Contact? - Joe McGonagle [30]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Fleming - Lan Fleming [15]
   Budd Hopkins Seminar - Feb. 2, 2002 - Intruders Foundation [47]
   Re: Kinross - Tenney - John Tenney [26]

  Jan 21:

   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [21]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard - Michael Haggard [25]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez - John Velez [205]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [22]
   Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap' - Mac Tonnies [67]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Sandow - Greg Sandow [52]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [33]
   Who Is The Mothman Expert? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [160]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [209]
   Alfred's Odd Observation #005 - Alfred Lehmberg [198]
   Life - In Space And Time - Joe McGonagle [11]
   Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap' - Joe McGonagle [9]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners - Jean Meiners [32]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - - Jim Mortellaro [53]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [17]
   Re: Weekly Briefing 1.21.02 - Paul Anderson [61]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Felder - Bobbie Felder [45]
   EW: NASA's Mars Odyssey to Study 'Face on Mars' - The Electric Warrior
   - Jonach [22]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez - John Velez [100]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - - Jim Mortellaro [386]
   Philip K. Dick [was: Review: Abduction in My Life] - Mac Tonnies [37]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [24]
   Re: Who Is The Mothman Expert? - Rutkowski - Chris Rutkowski [25]

  Jan 22:

   PRG Press Release - EXTRA Award - 1/21/02 - Stephen G. Bassett [66]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [287]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [47]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [251]
   Something In The Air - UFO UpDates - Toronto [142]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners - Jean Meiners [20]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners - Jean Meiners [18]
   Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - - Serge Salvaille [102]
   Cydonian Imperative: 01-22-02 Mars Odyssey to - Mac Tonnies [44]
   Tully Australia UFO History - Bill Chalker [43]
   Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard - Michael Haggard [44]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [33]

  Jan 23:

   Re: Roswell Threads - Randle - Kevin Randle [177]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [355]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [56]
   Re: Philip K. Dick - Sandow - Greg Sandow [25]
   Hall Thanks Anomalist - Richard Hall [7]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [32]
   Cydonian Imperative: 01-23-02 The Martian 'Sphinx' - Mac Tonnies [30]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [363]
   Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Chris Rutkowski [44]
   Sighting Reports From NIDS Database - Colm Kelleher [45]

  Jan 24:

   Secrecy News -- 01/23/02 - Steven Aftergood [168]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak - David Rudiak [143]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 4 - John Hayes [355]
   Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology - - Richard Hall [53]
   Messrs. Mortellaro & Velez - Moderator [12]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [24]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [85]
   Re: Hall Thanks Anomalist - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [12]
   UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey - Tom Benson [40]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Gates - Robert Gates [32]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Morris - Neil Morris [220]
   Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology - - Jerome Clark [74]
   http://www.wikipedia.com/ - Brian Cuthbertson [13]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [57]

  Jan 25:

   Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey - GT McCoy [34]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [84]
   Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology - - Chris Rutkowski
   [64]
   'Bonafide' Abductees? - Michelle Guerin [17]
   Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads] - David Rudiak [440]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #355 - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [78]
   Movie Review - The Mothman Prophecies - UFO UpDates - Toronto [89]
   Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey - - Steven Kaeser [60]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Kaeser - Steven Kaeser [38]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [168]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark - Jerome Clark [60]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Sandow - Greg Sandow [30]
   'Mothman' Sightings Will Continue - Loren Coleman [77]
   West Virginia Town Buzzing About 'Mothman' - Loren Coleman [21]
   Wolf Files On Mothman - Loren Coleman [76]
   Based On True-Life Story - Is Story For Real? - Loren Coleman [167]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hall - Richard Hall [50]

  Jan 26:

   New Hampshire Visited Again - UFO UpDates - Toronto [77]
   Secrecy News -- 01/25/02 - Steven Aftergood [91]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [51]
   Meier-Case Photos On Website - Jim Deardorff [50]
   John Alexander's Review Mothman Prophecies - Colm Kelleher [9]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Mothman & Looney Tunes 'Gossamer' - GT McCoy [9]
   New At 'Lost Haven' - Roy Hale [24]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates - Robert Gates [12]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy - Robert Gates [68]
   Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hatch - Larry Hatch [26]
   Filer'S Files #04 - 2002 - George A. Filer [535]
   Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hall - Richard Hall [44]
   Mothman Prophecies Movie - Jerome Clark [14]
   Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Jim Mortellaro [71]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [32]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer - John Rimmer [49]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [46]
   SDI - Tonight's Line-up - UFO UpDates - Toronto [2]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Coleman - Loren Coleman [15]
   Mothman Prophecies Heavy On Horror, Chills - UFO UpDates - Toronto [64]
   Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Hatch - Larry Hatch [10]

  Jan 27:

   Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - - Jim Mortellaro [15]
   Re: (was UFO UpDate: Welcome to The List (was - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [64]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [62]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman - Stan Friedman [70]
   Telepathic Football Threatens Chilean Teens - Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
   [19]
   New Zealand Returns - Bruce Maccabee [20]
   Re: - Bruce Maccabee [20]
   Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak - David Rudiak [530]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Rudiak - David Rudiak [520]
   Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Kelly - Christopher Kelly [26]
   Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg
   [119]
   Cydonian Imperative: 01-27-02 Cliff & Face - Mac Tonnies [69]

  Jan 28:

   PRG Update - January 27, 2002 - Stephen Bassett [128]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark - Jerome Clark [40]
   THE WATCHDOG - 01-27-02 - THE WATCHDOG - Royce J Myers III [26]
   UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Matt Hurley [8]
   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [23]
   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hebert - Amy Hebert [64]
   Point Pleasant Area Crashes Leave Five Dead - Loren Coleman [34]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [66]
   Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [38]
   9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
   [13]
   Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [84]
   Dear Mr. Naice-Speakah - Errol [18]
   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Coleman - Loren Coleman [25]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman - Stan Friedman [82]
   Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Friedman - Stan Friedman [58]
   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [34]
   Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [16]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - James Oberg [16]
   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Clark - Jerome Clark [41]
   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Kaeser - Steve Kaeser [19]
   Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - Hebert - Amy Hebert [20]
   Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.28.02 - Paul Anderson [46]

  Jan 29:

   Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak - David Rudiak [138]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - Virgilio
   Sanchez-Ocejo [25]
   Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - McCoy - GT McCoy [47]
   Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Fleming - Lan Fleming [14]
   Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak - David Rudiak [293]
   Canadian Crop Circle Summary Report 2001 - Paul Anderson [46]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [62]
   UFO Dreams? - Joe McGonagle [19]
   Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - Nick Balaskas [37]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates - Robert Gates <>RGates8254@aol.com [98]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [33]
   UFO Alarm In Turkish City - Erol Erkmen [23]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - James Oberg [12]
   Re: oswell Threads Pt I - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [47]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer - John Rimmer [45]
   Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - Oberg - James Oberg [33]
   2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Chris Rutkowski [35]
   Aging NASA Spacecraft To Re-enter Earth's - NASANews@hq.nasa.gov [65]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark - Jerome Clark [38]

  Jan 30:

   Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners - Jean Meiners [12]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [22]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak - David Rudiak [100]
   Secrecy News -- 01/29/02 - Steven Aftergood [87]
   Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - McCoy - GT McCoy [71]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates - Robert Gates [30]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - Larry Hatch [53]
   Re: Manned Spaceflight - Young - Kenny Young [41]
   Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Hyvonen - Minna Hyv=F6nen
   [55]
   'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [20]

  Jan 31:

   Filer's Files - 05 2002 - George A. Filer [497]
   Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Gevaerd - A. J. Gevaerd [25]
   Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Boreham - Robert Boreham [21]
   Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Hamilton - Bill Hamilton [71]
   Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? - - Jean Meiners [30]
   Manned V-1's - Steven J. Dunn [6]
   V-1 'Buzz Bombs' & Hanna Reistch - GT McCoy [11]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak - David Rudiak [98]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [75]
   Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? - - Larry Hatch [26]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [113]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - Virgilio
   Sanchez-Ocejo [43]
   Kelly Cahill On Banana TV's 'UFO' - Bill Chalker [38]
   Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - - Jim Mortellaro [110]
   Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman - - James Oberg [12]
   Re: Manned V-1's - McCoy - GT McCoy [28]
   The Nashville & Waterbury 'UFO' Photographs - James Easton [114]
   Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners - Jean Meiners [43]
   Re: Manned V-1's - Oberg - James Oberg [43]
   Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [360]
   Magonia Supplement No. 38 - John Rimmer [414]
   Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Hutchinson - Bruce Hutchinson [372]
   The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids - Jim Mortellaro [82]





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                    Re: Roswell - Tourist Trap? - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:33:13 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:43:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell - Tourist Trap? - Randle


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Roswell - Tourist Trap? [was: 2002: Year Of The Mothman?]
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:30:13 -0400


 >>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:45:36 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: 2002: Year Of The Mothman?
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: 2002: Year Of The Mothman?
 >>>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:17:00 -0400

 >><snip>

 >>>I must object to calling Roswell a tourist trap. Prices for
 >>>everything are very reasonable. Entry in to the museum is free.

 >>>Fine steaks at reasonable prices at the Cattle Baron, there is a
 >>>Walmart and lots of friendly people.

 >>There are tourist traps and Tourist Traps. Roswell may not have
 >>the high prices characteristic of a bona fide Tourist Trap, but
 >>it has many of the trappings of a lower case tourist trap,
 >>nonetheless. It's a classic case of a small town with a stagnant
 >>economy taking advantage of its newfound claim to fame. Not that
 >>there's anything wrong with that. If I were on the Roswell
 >>Chamber of Commerce board, I'd probably do the same thing.

 >Dennis, I am pleased that Roswell has been demoted to a tourist
 >trap instead of a Tourist Trap!! Personally I find Houston, Las
 >Vegas and Phoenix to be much more uncomfortable in the summer
 >than Roswell... perhaps because of its altitude.

Stan, Dennis, List, all -

I think here I would have to vote for Las Vegas. It really is no
more uncomfortable in the summer than Roswell, you can get all
sorts of wonderful food for very little money (let's hear it for
50 cent shrimp cocktails) and you can gamble there. Gamble on
the Apache reservation up around Riodoso just isn't the same.

 >Perhaps you didn't notice the letter on the museum wall about
 >the fact that the Corn Ranch land was not accessible by vehicle
 >in 1947 from a member of the McKnight Family who then owned what
 >is now called the Corn Ranch?

Pretty funny, this. An affidavit signed by a man who wasn't
there in 1947 and who never lived there. Signed by a man who
said that he never heard any family stories about these
activities and concluded, therefore, they had never happened.

Pretty funny that an Army that could cross Europe, often without
the benefit of roads, that fought in the jungles of the South
Pacific and took the Philippines back from the Japanese,
couldn't cross a dry arroyo in 1947. I thought those jeeps could
navigate just about everything. I thought the six by six trucks
that had drive to all axles could navigate just about
everything. While it might be true that the ford we all used in
the 1990s wasn't there in 1947, there are areas of the arroyo
that could be defeated by four and six-wheel drive vehicles.

Also pretty funny that the museum, which tried to get Corn to
participate in some kind of exploitation of the site... Corn
gets to pay for the improvements, pay for the insurance, is
responsible for all the financial arrangements and then can give
half or three-quarters of the money to the museum... suddenly is
no longer interested in the Corn site. When he refused, they
found a new site, based on what Jim Ragsdale told Max Littell.

Not to mention the Ragsdale story that originally took place on
the Corn ranch, as defined by both maps and photographs, was
suddenly out west of Roswell near Boy Scout Mountain. Pretty
funny that those who were actually in that area in 1947 said
that nothing crashed near them, but the museum went right along
selling the Ragsdale tale.

Pretty funny that Ragsdale tells of a jewel encrusted throne
inside the saucer that he originally said he never approached.
He claimed that he pulled the gold helmets from the bodies of
the crew and then buried those helmets out there. I can think of
few metals that would be as useless as gold as a helmet. The
last thing you'd want are helmets made of a soft metal that was
very heavy.

The point here, however, is that a letter signed by a man who
didn't live on the ranch in 1947, hanging in a museum that had
tried to gain a financial benefit to a ranch it didn't own,
isn't worth much in the final analysis. Especially when it is
remembered that the same museum is promoting a story, as told by
Ragsdale, that is contradicted by his earlier statements, has
virtually no corroborative evidence, and fits none of the few
facts that anyone has been able to establish.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:31:22 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:47:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Kaeser


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:48:37 -0600

 >>From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>>Date: 30 Dec 2001 13:24:06 -0800
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>From: sqquishy@altavista.com
 >>>Subject: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>>As a part of those studies for the President, Marcia Smith
 >>>brought on board Daniel Sheehan... Sheehan reported that
 >>>Ms. Smith told him that President elect Carter had
 >>>requested all the UFO files, from then Director of Central
 >>>Intelligence George Bush, and was told that he as
 >>>President would have no need-to-know for this particular subject.

 >>Smith appears not to remember it this way.

 >This story has been told in many different venues for months
 >now... why wouldn't this suspicious denial have surfaced
 >before? I smell one of your rats Mr. Oberg.

Actually, I think that Sheehan's story has remained very
constant, but he seems to have stopped promoting it of late.
During the summer he was queried about the specifics of this
episode and IMO he has de-emphasized much of what had been
touted previously during the Greer event in DC.

 >>>Sheehan has also reported on many occasions that Marcia
 >>>Smith got him access to the classified portions of the
 >>>USAF Project Blue Book files, which he was able to view in
 >>>a basement vault in the Madison Building in Washington.
 >>>While viewing these files, Sheehan reported that he viewed
 >>>a number of photos of a crashed flying saucer in a
 >>>snowbank, being investigated by USAF members.

 >>Oh, the old 'underground vault' and 'crashed saucer photos'
 >>again - how many people have we heard jumping on this
 >>look-how-important-I-am story?

 >Mr. Sheehan doesn't need underground vaults and crashed
 >saucer photos to look important. He has Watergate, Wounded
 >Knee, Iran-Contra, Karen Silkwood, and Harvard's Dr. Mack to
 >do all that. And it remains that Jimmy Carter, perhaps the
 >best example of an American President in (at least) the 20th
 >and 21st centuries, was told by the father of Forest Gump JR
 >that he did not have a "need to know" regarding a
 >subsequently _obvious_ collection of UFO evidence, and
 >reported a UFO himself at one time as the Governor of a
 >State. Carter _would_ have a reason to get to the bottom of
 >the aggregate conundrum, wouldn't he, and he might employ
 >such a mechanism as has been reported. Your trademark
 >ridicule is once again seen for what it is, a distraction
 >from the issues at hand with derisive smoke and mirrors and
 >the usual baseless character assassination. BUSTED!

Sheehan's involvement in the cases you've mentioned is not at
issue. His anecdotal commentary that doesn't appear to fit the
facts is certainly open to discussion. I would like to pursue
the claim that he went to the Madison building to view UFO
information (in a guarded room), which doesn't make a lot of
sense. As far as the building itself is concerned, the
cornerstone was laid in 1974 and Pres. Ronald Reagan
participated in dedication ceremonies on November 20, 1981. I
don't seem to recall if Sheehan narrowed down the time frame as
to this visit to the Madison, but I think Carter performed the
bulk of his inquiry into the subject during his first term,
rather than the second. The Madison was only two years into
construction when Carter's second term began.

During Sheehan's visit to DC during the 'Disclosure Project
Briefing' I had the opportunity of meeting him at an area
restaurant. He is a very interesting person and I would be most
interested in hearing more details. Unfortunately, his visit to
the Madison wasn't even mentioned that evening, in spite of his
discussion of his Carter/UFO involvement.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                     Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:46:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:54:40 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall


 >From: Ktperehwon@aol.com
 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:12:07 EST
 >Subject: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Dear Fellow List Fiends -


 >Second, I had hoped to have ended this thread with my last
 >posting, but Dick found it necessary once again to overstep the
 >bounds of good manners and good sense with the following
 >posting:

Karl,

When people threaten me with a lawsuit, after saying all sorts
of insulting things about me all over the place (as in Moseley's
filthy rag which you equate with sensible, rational UFO
research), I think this is something the List should know about.
"Manners" be damned.

 >>- Dick

 >So I'm left with no choice but to respond. Rest assured that
 >this is my final word (here) on this matter. Note that, as Errol
 >has reminded me, legal and ethical considerations prevent me
 >from quoting directly from private communications I've received
 >from Dick and Don Berliner, so I am constrained to paraphrase. I
 >assure List members that my paraphrasing accurately represents
 >both the tone and substance of these communications. If Dick and
 >Don think otherwise, they need only post their unexpurgated
 >messages to me on UpDates. Now then...

 >On 28 Dec, I sent this off-list message to Dick:

 >"MR. HALL - Quoting from your 27dec01 post to UFO UpDates,
 >which I've retained for future reference if necessary:

 >"'Among the more honorable Roswell researchers has been Kevin
 >Randle [I most definitely agree - KTP], who (like all of us) was
 >surprised to learn that his colleague Don Schmitt was somewhat
 >ethically deprived (as is Pflock when it comes to purloined
 >tapes).'

 >"Look who's calling whom ethically deprived! Don't push it,
 >buster, or you'll find yourself on the short end of a very
 >unpleasant and expensive legal action. - Most sincerely, KARL
 >PFLOCK"

 >To this Dick replied (same date) with a childish

[read 'well->deserved']

 >retort of the
 >sort most of us left off of in junior high school, but which
 >those of us who know the private, real Dick well have come to
 >expect from him at the slightest provocation.

You know almost nothing about me privately. But when I am
struck, I do strike back as you are learning.

 >To which I oh-so-maturely responded (same date): "How very
 >mature of you..."

 >Obviously, what's at issue is Dick's subtle attempt to raise
 >questions in list members' minds about my integrity: "as is
 >Pflock when it comes to purloined tapes." Here's what's behind
 >this sleazy and baseless canard:

[See my comments below]

 >(1) When I was conducting my Roswell research under a grant from
 >the Fund for UFO Research, Fred Whiting, then an officer and
 >board member of the Fund, loaned me the Fund's collection of
 >uncut videotape interviews with Roswell witnesses and
 >"witnesses" so that I would have the benefit of full knowledge
 >of what these people had to say and how they said it.

 >(2) On February 29, 1996, I returned ALL tapes to the Fund
 >through Dick Hall, then chairman of the Fund.

 >(3) More than three years later, on June 15, 1999, in response
 >to a request from Tom Tulien and Jan Aldrich for a listing of
 >the materials in my UFO library and research files for inclusion
 >in the Proceedings of the Sign Historical Group UFO History
 >Workshop, I sent Tom and Jan a very hastily written e-mail
 >message summarizing my holdings. With reference to my Roswell
 >materials, I wrote: "...includes complete set of all uncut
 >videos of Roswell witnesses and 'witnesses' done by and for
 >FUFOR." I hit the Send button without reviewing what I'd
 >written. Had I taken a couple of moments to check my words, I
 >would have caught my error and rewitten thus: "includes research
 >notes taken while viewing...," etc. Haste makes waste (and
 >worse!).

 >(4) On Sept. 11, 1999, I recieved a remarkably intemperate - no,
 >downright nasty and threatening - letter (dated Aug. 31) from
 >Don Berliner, Dick's successor as Fund chairman. Don advised
 >that he'd been told I had a complete set of the Fund Roswell
 >interview tapes and was planning to make copies available to
 >Sign Historical Group Workshop participants. He then ranted that
 >I had no right to the tapes and that Fred Whiting had no
 >authority to loan them to me and had done so without the
 >knowledge of his Fund colleagues. (Hmmm... I had a Fund grant to
 >investigate Roswell, but it was inappropriate to make available
 >to me important primary research materials possessed by the
 >Fund?)

 >He went on to tell me that if I didn't immediately return all
 >copies of the tapes, the Fund would take legal action against
 >me. To underscore the Fund's resolve, he pointed out that such
 >action had been taken against Steven Greer for distributing
 >copies of a UFO Research Coalition publication.

 >Don and I know each other fairly well and have even worked
 >together on some aspects of Roswell. Yet instead of approaching
 >me like a colleague, inquiring if the information he had was
 >accurate - it wasn't in any respect - and, if so, noting that it
 >appeared that I'd forgotten the tapes were Fund property and to
 >please return them, he assumed the worst and acted the bully.

 >(5) On Sept. 11, '99, I replied to Berliner in part:

 >"For the record: (1) Fred Whiting, in his capacity as an officer
 >and member of the board of the Fund, loaned the Fund Roswell
 >witness/'witness' tapes to me as research material for use
 >during my Fund-supported Roswell investigation. Clearly, this
 >was entirely proper and appropriate to the work I was doing on
 >behalf of the Fund. (2) On February 29, 1996..., I returned all
 >Fund tapes to the Fund via Dick Hall at the Fund post office box
 >address. (3) With the return of the Fund tapes, I no longer had
 >any Fund property of any sort in my possession and have not
 >since. I regret my haste in preparing information designed to
 >facilitate cooperation and information sharing among colleagues
 >led to this misunderstanding and trust this letter and its
 >enclosures, as well as my action today to straighten things out
 >with the SHG folks [e-mail correcting the reference to the
 >tapes; see corrected information on p. 197, Proceedings], will
 >bring this matter to a close.

 >"It is unfortunate you chose to be so confrontational and
 >threatening in your initial communication to me. School-
 >yard-style bluster and threats of legal action are hardly the
 >way to begin addressing such an issue with a colleague or, for
 >that matter, anyone else. However, since you chose such a
 >course, I feel it is incumbent upon me to put you on notice that
 >I will not hesitate to take legal action against you personally
 >and, if appropriate, the Fund and its officers and board should
 >it come to my attention that you or anyone associated with the
 >Fund have made any utterances of any kind in any context calling
 >into question my honor, integrity, and professionalism with
 >respect to the Fund tapes and my use of them. I regret the
 >necessity for the foregoing statement, but I've suffered enough
 >blackguarding at the hands of ufological paranoids, fools, and
 >opportunists [believer & debunker alike], and I'm not about to
 >take any such from you without exacting a heavy price."

 >This is where the matter stood until Dick chose to insinuate it
 >into his ad hominem attack on me here on UpDates, thus
 >precipitating my "have a care" message to him.

Spoken by the master of ad hominem!

 >There is no doubt that Dick Hall is fully aware of all of the
 >foregoing. He knows damn' well there was nothing underhanded or
 >in the least out of line involved. His and Don's problem is that
 >I, a Fund grantee, had arrived at the "wrong" conclusions about
 >Roswell.

 >I leave it to List members to decide for themselves how Dick and
 >I measure up ethically.


This self-serving statement is false and distorted in so many
particulars that I intend early in the New Year to respond in
detail. However, I don't want to shoot from the lip so I will
first review the files of documents and correspondence, which I
don't have time for right now.

Within the next few weeks I will post a notice to the List that
my rebuttal is available, and will send an e-mail copy to anyone
who is interested off-list. We can air this bit of dirty laundry
that way in semi-private.

The simple truth is that the set of videotaped interviews with
Roswell witnesses were quite unethically 'purloined' by Whiting
and Pflock behind the backs of members of the Fund for UFO
Research Executive Committee, without either our knowledge or
consent. We didn't even know about it until after Whiting had
resigned from the Fund and we asked him to return the tapes to
us. This was not done in the context of the Fund's support for
Pflock's research nor in the time scale claimed by Mr. Pflock,
as I hope to demonstrate.

More later. Let's get on with some constructive exchanges.


- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:05:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:56:01 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall


 >From: Ktperehwon@aol.com
 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:12:07 EST
 >Subject: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >I leave it to List members to decide for themselves how Dick and
 >I measure up ethically.

For my part I accept that certain people can never "just get along" and
to me, this looks like a typical case of "bad blood".

Another thing to remember is:

If you plead lily white, no one will ever believe if you, plead to a
lesser crime, and you just might get away with it.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:14:59 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:57:46 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:33:01 +0000


Dick, List,

Pardon me; my razor-sharp mind isn't what it once was.

The individual I've been referring to as Kent Lorenzo is in fact
Lorenzo Kent Kimball.

I'm not sure his original web site is still up, but you can find
most of the info below:

http://www.grassyhill.com/Roswell/Witnesses/CaptKimball.htm

Sorry for any confusion.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                    Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:29:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:00:11 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Velez


 >From: Ktperehwon@aol.com
 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:12:07 EST
 >Subject: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Dear Fellow List Fiends -

 >First, an apology to all for having started this virtual
 >shouting match with an mildly intemperate taunt directed at Dick
 >Hall. I can only plead "all too human." The simple truth is
 >that, while I have great respect and admiration for Dick Hall's
 >contributions to ufology and, ironically, agree with him on far
 >more ufological issues than I disagree, I can't stand the man
 >personally. Obviously, he feels the same about me. It's
 >unfortunate personalities have to get in the way of collegial
 >discussion of important substantive issues. I'll do my best to
 >avoid contributing such unneeded and debilitating heat to this
 >list in the future (honest, Errol. I will!).

 >Second, I had hoped to have ended this thread with my last
 >posting, but Dick found it necessary once again to overstep the
 >bounds of good manners and good sense with the following
 >posting:

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 21:26:25 +0000

 >>List,

 >>Just to give you a little more idea about the man, as a result
 >>of my December 27 post here, Karl Pflock has privately
 >>threatened me with a lawsuit via e-mail. Birds of a feather
 >>Pflock together: Karl, CSICOP, Klass, Moseley... skeptibunkers,
 >>and the ethicallly challenged in general.

 >>- Dick

 >So I'm left with no choice but to respond. Rest assured that
 >this is my final word (here) on this matter. Note that, as Errol
 >has reminded me, legal and ethical considerations prevent me
 >from quoting directly from private communications I've received
 >from Dick and Don Berliner, so I am constrained to paraphrase. I
 >assure List members that my paraphrasing accurately represents
 >both the tone and substance of these communications. If Dick and
 >Don think otherwise, they need only post their unexpurgated
 >messages to me on UpDates. Now then...

<snip>

Hello Karl,

 >I leave it to List members to decide for themselves how Dick and
 >I measure up ethically.

<LOL>

No contest Karl. You're not even in the same league as Dick
Hall. I don't know what yardstick you would have us use in order
to compare you to Dick Hall in _any_ way, but it would have to
be an awfully l-o-n-g ruler to to be able to span the distance
between you and him.

In terms of "measuring up" (by any standards) it's Dick Hall.
Hands down. What you really want to know is this: ufologically
speaking... his is longer than yours Karl! <LMAO>;)


Regards,

John Velez, Listerion looking for a long enough ruler.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

             Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:32:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:03:42 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods - Velez


 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 13:38:39 -0600
 >Subject: Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:01:13 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods

 >>There is a black, smoking hole in the middle of _my_ hometown,
 >>(I was born and raised on the island of Manhattan) that doubles
 >>as the largest mass grave in the US. To use it as a 'tool' for
 >>debate, or as it was used by the Disclosure organization is, to
 >>me, beneath contempt and a desecration of the memory of those so
 >>recently deceased. Where has your sensitivity gone? Don't tell
 >>me you cannot see how insensitive it is to use that tragic event
 >>the way that Greer's group (and now you by lauding it) is.

 >How do you know Greer is trying to 'use' the 9/11 disaster as a
 >'tool' for debate? And why do you put quotation marks around the
 >word 'tool' as if you are quoting Greer actually saying that was
 >his intent? Maybe he's just expressing an opinion (albeit a very
 >biased one, IMO).

Hi Lan,

Because it was "Greer's" disclosure Project that published a
'flyer' on this List (and I'm sure many others) stating that: If
more people had supported the disclosure Project's agenda that
the WTC tragedy could have been avoided.

I find that reference/usage of the incident (in which thousands
of innocents lost their lives) in order to raise support for his
(tape selling, three ring circus campaign) agenda to be
disgusting and low.

But hey, maybe you're right and Greer has no idea what is being
broadcast on the web in his name/Disclosure Project. I wouldn't
be at all surprised if he doesn't know. If he hasn't taken the
time to check out his own witnesses, why should we expect him to
know what his underlings, are up to.

You must have been away from the List the last several months or
you'd know exactly what I'm referring to. This isn't the first
time this issue has come up. I may have been the one who raised
it on the List the first time, but many others wrote in in
agreement. Check the UFO UpDates Archive.

 >Greer's perceived linkage of compartmentalized technology that
 >has not been proven to exist to the terrorist attack is, in my
 >opinion, extremely tenuous. But it still makes a heck of a lot
 >more sense than the supposed linkage between the star wars
 >defense against ICBMs and nuts armed with box cutters and
 >plastic explosives in their shoes.

I don't particularly care about what kind of off-the-wall
conspiracy theories Greer and his bunch are espousing lately. I
just objected (vehemently) to his usage of the WTC tragedy in
that context. Let him or anybody else speculate all they want
to. I just wanted to voice my opinion that I thought his choice
of one of this countries most painful losses/tragedies was in
piss-poor taste and an opportunistic act. He/his people, used
the incident as a 'tool' in order to raise support. It was a low
thing to do and just plain inexcusable.

Understand now?

Regards and very happy new year to all,


John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                       Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:12:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:05:54 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Ledger


 >From: Ingrid Hanson <froggy@rio.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: 'Dustbunny' Hunt?
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 09:44:31 -0800

 >Does anyone have any information about what finally happened
 >with this?

 >Inquiring minds are inquiring yet again....

 >Ingrid

I believe an invasion of Electroluxes fouled the experiment, however
Johnny V. will know best about this.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:33:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:10:49 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Ledger


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:33:01 +0000

 ><Big ol' snip>

 >Dick,

 >I'll keep my remarks as brief and cheery-minded as possible.

 >You've called for an open, objective investigation of Roswell.
 >(With which I concur.)

 >I assume that means that each witness is to be analyzed and
 >weighed with the same set of scales.

 >So when I use Kent Lorenzo as an example, it's not to suggest
 >that one Roswell witness who claims nothing untoward happened
 >there should trump two who claimed a spaceship with little
 >bodies crashed. It's to ask where Lorenzo is in all the books,
 >monologues, and videotaped interviews ufology has made over the
 >last several years. Where are all the other eyewitnesses
 >interviewed by Roswell investigators who had nothing
 >extraordinary to say about it?

 >Where, in other words, is the vaunted objectivity and balance?

 >I realize that "Roswell Witness Says Absolutely Nothing
 >Happened!" doesn't make for much of a headline; but if that's
 >truly half of the story, I sure haven't seen it promoted that
 >way in most of the Roswell material I've read and looked at.

 >How many other Roswell witnesses haven't been heard from because
 >they didn't have any tale to tell? Lorenzo was, I believe, the
 >second commanding medical officer at the hospital at the time.
 >Had bodies been brought in, he would almost undoubtedly have
 >been aware of them.

 >As near as I can tell, however, Roswell investigators have yet
 >to beat a path to his door.

 >Kent Jeffrey's long report may indeed have had its flaws. But
 >when he says he talked to a number of 509th veterans who said
 >nothing untoward took place, I have to take him at his word. Did
 >fellow ufologists ask him who his contacts were so they could
 >conduct follow up interviews? Or was he effectively hounded out
 >of the field?

 >Ufology's track record on Roswell is pretty self-evident: you
 >can do almost anything and remain a member in good standing -
 >just don't criticize Roswell.


The only problem I have with the above Dennis is that suppose
this had been a mass murder during a bank holdup in Roswell.
There were ten people in the bank and 3 holdup men. Six people
were killed in the bank. The three robbers escaped into the
street and were seen by 4 witnesses. Subsequently during a
massive shootout down the road with the police - or more likely
the sheriff and his deputies - the three robbers were killed.
It's reported in the paper - carried on the radio news - mass
murders and a big shootout.

Years later the case still fascinates writers and criminalogists
due to the bizzare and intensive circumstances. Other than
getting a little local color and reactions to this terrible
crime from those who were not witnesses to the event - does it
mean because they were not interviewed extensively by the
writers and criminologists that there would not be a balanced
analysis done of why it happened and what happened?

I'm not sure I see the value here. Taken to its logical
extension would this then mean that the robbery and killing of
the bank people and the crooks did not happen because most of
the townspeople didn't see it happen?

Roswell is certainly interesting if for the singular reason that
it seems to piss so many people off-both pro and con. I'm happy
right here on the fence.


Regards and a Happy New Year everyone,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

               Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 18:27:16 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:12:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Lehmberg


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 13:32:27 -0600

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:48:37 -0600

 >>So you've spun it. But unlike Fox's Bill O'Riley (at _least_ a
 >>man unashamed of his apostrophe) .....

 >You've lost me. What apostrophe am I accused of being ashamed
 >of?

It's a joke, Mr. Oberg. Polish your monocle and switch out your
cigarette holder. The serious stuff was emulsified in the acid
bath of your careful and completely non-referenced snippage. Not
a great way to start the new year...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                              Thank You So Much

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:29:57 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:15:05 -0500
Subject: Thank You So Much


Heartfelt thanks to all of you who wrote on List and off. I am
overwhelmed.

And most grateful.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Kimball

From: Paul Kimball <Redstarfilm@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:45:32 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:26:15 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Kimball


All:

I just finished producing and directing a documentary on the
life and times of Stan Friedman for Space and Bravo, two
television networks up here in Canada.

Among the many people we interviewed (and kudos here to Kevin
Randle and Don Ledger for their insights, which form an
invaluable part of the film) was Karl Pflock.

Having met and interviewed the man (at length), and read his
book (as well as extensive research in general about the Roswell
case), I feel obliged to state, given some of the recent posts
about him, that I was impressed by his candor and willingness to
be open in front of the camera, even when the questions were
rather pointed.

He struck me as a conscientious researcher, with a genuinely
open-minded point of view (which is not to say I agreed with him
- I remain, to coin one of Stan's phrases, a "healthy agnostic"
on Roswell), and a refreshing refreshing willingness to admit to
his mistakes.

Most important, his recent book challenges us all to take a
closer look at the Roswell case, and re-examine our own
opinions. Whether you agree with Plock's conclusions or not,
that is most definitely a good thing, and a positive
contribution to the debate, especially for those of us who
remain fascinated "lurkers".

To paraphrase Stan once again, everyone should avoid attacking
the person, and focus instead on the data (rule #3 for
debunkers, I think).


With respect,

Paul Kimball
Redstar Films Limited









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:22:01 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:28:20 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:12:12 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:44:51 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: New Year Agenda
 >>>Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:37:54 +0000

<snip>

 >>In other words... do you and Roswell have _any_ honorable
 >>critics? Or just pond scum?

 >What did pond scum ever do to you to deserve an insult like
 >that?

 >David Rudiak

 >Proud, card-carrying member of the Pond Scum Anti-Defamation
 >League


Yeah - people can say what they like about pond scum, but it
trumps a skeptibunky red tide.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                Re: Is Menzel To Be Re-Published? - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:18:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:31:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Is Menzel To Be Re-Published? - Maccabee


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:41:18 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Is Menzel To Be Re-Published?


<snip>

 >>Others might theorize that his 'agenda' (I dislike that word)
 >>was motivated by something related to national security, too
 >>many people watching the skies and reporting secret US missile
 >>tests or whatever as UFOs, while our adversaries lapped up
 >>whatever crumbs of info were thus made available.

 >>Still others suspect darker motives.

 >>Still, it seems inconceivable that a man of science could say
 >>"talking to witnesses was a waste of time"... that from Jerry
 >>Clark's UFO Encyclopedia, Vol. II L-Z pg.387, as quoted by
 >>Gross.


 >Hi Larry,

 >Certainly as well Menzel's [shady ?] intelligence connections
 >have to be explored. As you say Menzel's 'high school physics'
 >approach to the UFO inigma back in those early years was a major
 >turn-off for me when reading his book. One would have expected
 >better of the man [shades of Condon]. I must confess the man
 >really puzzles me, though before Stan Friedman brought out
 >Menzel's connection to the intelligence community-I'd simply put
 >him down to just another scientist unwilling to give the
 >phenomenon a serious look.

 >Imagine also my surprise to discover in Vallee's 'UFO Chronicles
 >of the Soviet Union: A Cosmic Samizdat' that at the absolute
 >height of the cold war in the early 60's that Menzel was being
 >published in Pravda as a serious debunker to the UFO question,
 >in support of the Soviet government's official anti-UFO line.

 >How weird is that?

Not so weird when you realize that Menzel was well respected in
the former Soviet Union. As I recall, he was in Russia on an
eclipse expedition in the 1930's and probably established a lot
of contacts.

For what it's worth, the fact that he was respected in the FSU
meant that his debunking of saucers carried considerable weight
there. In other words, if he were part of a cover up, he was the
optimum guy to convince the Soviets _not_ to look seriously at
the UFO phenomenon.


Best in the New 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                                  New Year

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:47:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:33:35 -0500
Subject: New Year


Lets make               2 0  0 2
the year of the            UFU
or is it                   OFO
?????









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 31 Dec 2001 19:21:39 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:38:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg

 >>Date: 30 Dec 2001 13:24:06 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: sqquishy@altavista.com
 >>Subject: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>As a part of those studies for the President, Marcia Smith
 >>brought on board Daniel Sheehan... Sheehan reported that Ms.
 >>Smith told him that President elect Carter had requested all the
 >>UFO files, from then Director of Central Intelligence George
 >>Bush, and was told that he as President would have no
 >>need-to-know for this particular subject.

 >Smith appears not to remember it this way.

Well, Jimmy. Here's your chance to rewrite history. You can
correct my distorted version of history based on what Marcia
confided to you. The 'Bush told Carter' story is a major tale in
Ufology, and even people at the Carter library are aware of it.
I will write them and tell them you are about to enlighten the
world with the truth.

 >>Sheehan has also reported on many occasions that Marcia Smith
 >>got him access to the classified portions of the USAF Project
 >>Blue Book files, which he was able to view in a basement vault
 >>in the Madison Building in Washington. While viewing these
 >>files, Sheehan reported that he viewed a number of photos of a
 >>crashed flying saucer in a snowbank, being investigated by USAF
 >>members.

 >Oh, the old 'underground vault' and 'crashed saucer photos'
 >again - how many people have we heard jumping on this
 >look-how-important-I-am story?

This neither you, nor I, nor Marcia can say for sure, as none of
us was there. The question you and Marcia can resolve is did
Marcia obtain access to classified Blue Book files for Mr.
Sheehan. If not what is her version of the story.

 >>Marcia Smith knows exactly what the future of space is.
 >>Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that she told the listeners of
 >>NPR.

 >Smith does not appear to remember it this way, that Sheehan is
 >telling it.

Which leads to your homework questions:

1) Did Marcia bring Sheehan on board to help do a report of UFOs
   and a report on ETI?

2) Did Marcia ask Sheehan to contact the Vatican library for
   their UFO files?

3) Did Marcia get access to classified Blue Book files for Mr.
   Sheehan?

4) What is Marcia's version of the story about what George Bush
   Sr. replied when asked about UFOs by Jimmy Carter?

5) How many times did you talk to Marcia about this, and when
   were these conversations?

6) Most importantly, for those who may read this at the Carter
   library - where are the files for all these events??



Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.com
Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:22:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:43:39 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:12:12 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Poor Kent Lorenzo. Dennis regularly drags him out as his
 >personal poster boy for Roswell witnesses who supposedly
 >disprove anything happened. But all the man basically had to say
 >was , "I wasn't aware of anything happening."


David,

See my most recent post, prior to this one. Lorenzo Kent
Kimball, and others like him, is your problem, not mine.

He was the second medical officer in command at Roswell. If
bodies had been brought in he would surely have been aware of
them. The fact that he wasn't aware of anything happening speaks
volumes - you just don't like what you hear.

 >Put Dennis in charge of a criminal investigation and have him
 >canvas a neighborhood for witnesses. He finds 5 people who claim
 >to know something and 30 who were watching television and say
 >they didn't hear or see anything.

 >That would be the end of the investigation on Dennis' beat.
 >There was no crime. The 30 no-nothings would trump the 5
 >possible know-somethings. Those who claim to know something must
 >be mistaken, liars, or loonies. That seems to be the logic at
 >work here.

Yeah, and put you in charge of Roswell and we'd have just the
same sort of ridiculous situation we currently have - crash
sites and recovered bodies everywhere, with no end in sight, and
'witnesses' like Dennis, Anderson, Kaufmann, Rowe and others
probably going unchallenged. Certainly you would never have
cared whether they were being truthful or not.


Again, see my previous post. I never said or implied that
Kimball's testimony trumped that of two other witnesses. I
asked: how many other witnesses similar to Kimball have been
ignored or overlooked by Roswelll proponents simply because they
didn't have an extraordinary tale to tell?

It was Aldous Huxley who said that "the unexciting truth is
often eclipsed by the exciting lie." Is that what's happened
with Roswell? I don't know. What I damn well do know is that you
and other so-called Roswell investigators are a helluva lot more
interested in those witnesses who support your sensational case
than in those who don't.

Excuse me for calling attention to the latter - as you never
would.

<snip>

 >There _is_ a document of unimpeachable provenance that _proves_
 >something 'toward' happened at Roswell. It's called the Ramey
 >telegram. It states unequivocably that there were "victims" and
 >then it goes on to discuss that something "in the 'disc'" was
 >going to be shipped.

 >So there were 'victims' and there was an object Ramey calls a
 >"disc". How does a Mogul balloon crash produce "victims"?

 >Furthermore, can you explain why Ramey would be calling the
 >crash object a "disc"?

 >Think carefully Dennis. This is an intelligence test. If your
 >typical, knee-jerk, skepti-bunky response is that a Mogul radar
 >target was the "disc", then you have to explain why Ramey talks
 >about something "in the 'disc'" being shipped. Radar targets
 >didn't have any insides.

You think carefully, David. Ramey isn't calling anything
anything. If you assume he's the recipient, and not the sender,
of the teletype in hand. But maybe you think it's the other way
around?

As I've said before: your Rorshach reading of the text in his
hand is your reading. Others on your side of the argument beg to
differ. Let's see a consensus - it doesn't have to be unanimous.
But I'm not going to get into a discussion about it with you
based on the Rudiak reading of it and the Rudiak reading alone.
I've already said that you're welcome to your personal
interpretation and that I think there may yet be much to be
revealed in the teletype.

 >Even Top Secret documents, if they existed, with similar denials
 >would prove nothing if the sender and/or reciprient lacked the
 >proper clearances. Because of compartmentalization, even if all
 >the parties had Top Secret clearances, this does not mean the
 >parties would be privy to all Top Secret information.

Blather. What you're really saying is that no document would
dissuade you of your version of Roswell. Rudiak's "out", in
other words.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

             Re: Uninvited White Things On My Lawn - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 00:45:08 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:46:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Uninvited White Things On My Lawn - Mortellaro


 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 08:52:48 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Uninvited White Things On My Lawn

 >Dear sirs and Mmes:

 >All sorts of uninvited hack restaurant reviews and gawd knows
 >what else wind up on my poor unmowed California lawn.

Dear Hatcher, List and Errol,

I must admit that I can sympathise... sympathize. Uh, where wuz
I? Oh, the uninvited thingies on _my_ lawn are not hack
restaurant reviews. They are, however, 'what else!' Once, when I
wuz about four, this round thing with lights on it, and windows
(I think) all 'round, and not "... a woman's face in every
one... " as in Dylan's Ballad of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest. I
did, howsumever, almost die of thirst as did Mr. Priest did.

The moral of this story, the moral of this song, is that them
bastards, should never be where they don't belong. Which is also
true of a number of other duds... dudes... around these hear
parts. Here parts.

Merry Happy. I know I am. In spite of mom being a hunnert miles
away in that stinky, filthy, dirty, rotten, unsafe and generally
miserable place called (Eeeek!) New Yawk, which I hate with a
passion, she is with me.

Unfortunately so are the bastards and the left over Grappa and
other assorted ketones. (hic! - Excuse me).

 >Its awful really, and mostly my fault for being lazy and too
 >cheap to hire decent assistancias.

Hey, we gots the same type-a hep here. What a co-inky-dink.
Hmmm. Wuner why?

Oil well...


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:52:05 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Randle


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:33:01 +0000

Dick, Dennis, All -

This has gone on a little too long now. Let's all step back for
a dose of perspective.

Dennis wrote,

 >Dick,

 >I'll keep my remarks as brief and cheery-minded as possible.
 >You've called for an open, objective investigation of Roswell.
 >(With which I concur.)

 >I assume that means that each witness is to be analyzed and
 >weighed with the same set of scales.

 >So when I use Kent Lorenzo as an example, it's not to suggest
 >that one Roswell witness who claims nothing untoward happened
 >there should trump two who claimed a spaceship with little
 >bodies crashed. It's to ask where Lorenzo is in all the books,
 >monologues, and videotaped interviews ufology has made over the
 >last several years. Where are all the other eyewitnesses
 >interviewed by Roswell investigators who had nothing
 >extraordinary to say about it?

First, I have talked to Lorenzo, especially after he erected a
website that suggested that he was a good friend of Jesse B.
Johnson, who I suggested had been the base pathologist. Yes, Don
Schmitt looked him up in the Compendium of Medical Specialties
and said that Johnson had studied to be a pathologist. Lorenzo
said not so, at least in 1947, so I looked him up and found that
Johnson had, in fact, been a pathologist but that he had taken
his training after he was released from active duty. I reported
these facts in The Roswell Encyclopedia.

 >Where, in other words, is the vaunted objectivity and balance?

 >I realize that "Roswell Witness Says Absolutely Nothing
 >Happened!" doesn't make for much of a headline; but if that's
 >truly half of the story, I sure haven't seen it promoted that
 >way in most of the Roswell material I've read and looked at.

I considered writing an article about the "busted" leads which
would incorporate all those people we talked to who had nothing
to say, but then, really, where is the story? A witness who saw
nothing, heard nothing and did nothing is not a witness.

 >How many other Roswell witnesses haven't been heard from because
 >they didn't have any tale to tell? Lorenzo was, I believe, the
 >second commanding medical officer at the hospital at the time.
 >Had bodies been brought in, he would almost undoubtedly have
 >been aware of them.

This really makes very little sense. Roswell witnesses who had
no tale to tell? What then, makes them witnesses? Yes, they
might have been assigned to the base, but if not involved in the
recovery (Mogul or otherwise), and they have nothing to
contribute, then what should we report. I thought we had made it
clear that the majority of the soldiers assigned to the base saw
nothing and heard very little.

I don't know what a second commanding officer might be other
than an executive officer and the information I have, from both the
yearbook and the telephone directory suggests that Lorenzo was
neither. That doesn't negate what he says, only that he was one of
many medical personnel assigned to the base in July 1947.

 >As near as I can tell, however, Roswell investigators have yet
 >to beat a path to his door.

So, I looked at his website and talked to him on the telephone.
I followed up with additional questions and moved on. I reported
what he said as it related to Jesse B. Johnson. What more would
you have me do?

 >Kent Jeffrey's long report may indeed have had its flaws. But
 >when he says he talked to a number of 509th veterans who said
 >nothing untoward took place, I have to take him at his word. Did
 >fellow ufologists ask him who his contacts were so they could
 >conduct follow up interviews? Or was he effectively hounded out
 >of the field?

Here's where this really breaks down. Yes, Kent talked to a
number of pilots and others who were assigned to the 509th in
July, 1947. Yes, he, and I talked to people who were there and
who said they had heard nothing about the UFO crash, the little
bodies, or anything else (which is quite foolish since part of
the story was on the front pages of both the daily newspapers in
July 1947, but let's forget that).

The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
classified, then those who were not involved would not be
expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
held.

I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
classified material and security clearances knows that.

I have tried to report on all the relevant materials so that
those who have not had the opportunities I have can look at
Roswell and make a rational decision. I reported that every
member of Blanchard's staff that we interviewed (or others
interviewed) who commented on this said that something unusual
happened with the exception of Colonel Robert Barrowclough. I
reported what he said in his hand- written note to Kent Jeffrey,
and that he said nothing happened.

But it really comes down to this. Kent Jeffrey reported on what
he was told by officers who were either not involved in the
recovery, or who were not there in the proper time frame.
Interviewing the former chiefs of ATIC, who started their
activities in 1957 and not in 1947, does nothing to tell us what
went on ten years earlier. Interviewing officers who were in
Roswell but heard nothing of the tale tells us nothing about
what might have happened, especially when the members of
Blanchard's staff, the men who were involved, with the one cited
exception, say something else.

I have reported on the destruction of the Glenn Dennis tale, on
the destruction of the Jim Ragsdale tale, the shifting nature of
some of the stories, and have exposed any number of those who
were inventing the stories. The only reason that everyone knows
that Curry Holden's wife thought his story of the Roswell crash
was something that he "invented" at his advanced age is because
I reported what she said to me. And I reported what his daughter
said to both Mark Rodegheir and to me.

I haven't reported, for example, on what a four-star general
told me because he didn't know of anything that happened in
Roswell in 1947... and he really wasn't in a position to know
anything either.

Just to jump on the other side, have you taken the Air Force to
task for their "good faith" effort in explaining Roswell in
their 1994 report? I notice that they don't quote from Brigadier
General Arthur Exon, though they knew who he was because I told
McAndrews. I notice that they mention nothing about Edwin
Easley, and while they couldn't interview him, they had copies
of my taped interviews but failed to mention that the provost
marshal at Roswell said, repeatedly, he had been swore to
secrecy. I notice that they mentioned nothing of what Lewis
Rickett had to say, which contradicted Cavitt, but knew of him
because I told them what he said and supplied them with tapes.

The point here is that I can line up as much information and
indignation on my side of the fence as you can on yours. I can
show duplicity on the part of the Air Force in their
investigations, and I can point to a number of interviews with
Charles Moore and the mogul boys that I have reported on.

This affair is not as one sided as you seem to indicate here.
There is plenty of slop on both sides and many mistakes were
made. (Need I point out here that I actually believed that Don
Schmitt was telling me the truth about what he was doing and
later found out differently?). So, to answer the questions, yes,
I have talked to these people, and I have reported on those who
had something relevant to say. I have not reported on those who
saw nothing because they saw nothing. And I have been quick to
expose those who were less than candid when I have learned the
truth about them.

The point is that those who don't know anything don't know
anything and for them to believe, because they were in the 509th
in July, 1947, that they would have known something, is foolish.
The circle of those involved was limited and security reared its
ugly head. For every one that Kent can produce who said he heard
nothing, I can point to another who has.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods -

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:33:44 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:54:13 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods -


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:32:04 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: SDI Wrap-Up Of 2001 With Mr. M.J. Woods

 >I don't particularly care about what kind of off-the-wall
 >conspiracy theories Greer and his bunch are espousing lately. I
 >just objected (vehemently) to his usage of the WTC tragedy in
 >that context. Let him or anybody else speculate all they want
 >to. I just wanted to voice my opinion that I thought his choice
 >of one of this countries most painful losses/tragedies was in
 >piss-poor taste and an opportunistic act. He/his people, used
 >the incident as a 'tool' in order to raise support. It was a low
 >thing to do and just plain inexcusable.

The "conspiracy theories" regarding 9/11 that I've had the
misfortune to read about implicate various combinations of
Israel, George Bush, Al Gore, the ACLU, or (naturally) BIll
Clinton. If Greer or his supporters have been promulgating such
vicious unsubstantiated nonsense, then they would deserve to be
condemned. But it appears to me that all they've been doing is
saying that the tragedy could have been avoided if circumstances
had been different in certain ways (related to their own views
on the way things ought to be). If that makes them exploitative
conspiracy theorists, then just about everyone in the country
would be, too.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 11:05:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Dustbunny' Hunt? - Velez


 >From: Ingrid Hanson <froggy@rio.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: 'Dustbunny' Hunt?
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 09:44:31 -0800

 >Does anyone have any information about what finally happened
 >with this?

 >Inquiring minds are inquiring yet again....


Hi Ingrid,

I have told you privately, and posted to the List that; I am
awaiting some kind of 'report' from Nick (which I never
received) before I post anything to the web. What I do have is,
scads of photos of dust.

Nothing unusual (like the little glass-like thingies that
Levengood found) appear in any of the photos. Whenever Nick
sends me a formal report on his own findings it will be posted.
Putting up pictures of 'dust' without any commentary would not
serve any useful purpose.


Regards,

John Velez












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 10:50:02 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 21:34:45 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >From: Paul Kimball <Redstarfilm@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:45:32 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >All:

 >I just finished producing and directing a documentary on the
 >life and times of Stan Friedman for Space and Bravo, two
 >television networks up here in Canada.

Additionally, I think he may (arguably) be the single researcher
to have had a substantive metaphoric ode (iidssm) written about
him, by a poet of any stripe, highlighting his unique
philosopher/warrior spirit, solid contribution, and monumental
integrity. I'm glad to hear that he's continuing to get the
recognition that he richly deserves.

 >Among the many people we interviewed (and kudos here to Kevin
 >Randle and Don Ledger for their insights, which form an
 >invaluable part of the film) was Karl Pflock.

Certainly a wonderful opportunity for Mr. Pflock to appear
reasonable, but moot, really. Truth is? There's just not a
whole lot that can be said bad about Stanton Friedman.

 >Having met and interviewed the man (at length), and read his
 >book (as well as extensive research in general about the Roswell
 >case), I feel obliged to state, given some of the recent posts
 >about him, that I was impressed by his candor and willingness to
 >be open in front of the camera, even when the questions were
 >rather pointed.

I'll bet he was the _soul_ of perspicacious good behavior. I've
been told I give a good interview myself. <g>.

 >He struck me as a conscientious researcher, with a genuinely
 >open-minded point of view (which is not to say I agreed with him

Perhaps he's an acquired taste, but over the years he's struck
me to as close to the antithesis of your assessment as one could
get and not be running hard the other direction... I understand
that OBL (or UBL if you want to twist the knife like Rupert
Murdoch) has a very ironic conscientious effect on people in
direct contact with him that is cubed from what he might be able
to transmit on television (a metaphor, and not a direct
comparison... please). Perhaps Mr. Phlock is an adept at turning
on a required charm... the result of his training, out there, at
the farm. <g>.

 >- I remain, to coin one of Stan's phrases, a "healthy agnostic"
 >on Roswell), and a refreshing refreshing willingness to admit to
 >his mistakes.

Astonishing. I'm looking forward to meeting him someday myself,
but I'll be wearing a tinfoil helmet just to be on the safe
side. <g>.

 >Most important, his recent book challenges us all to take a
 >closer look at the Roswell case, and re-examine our own
 >opinions. Whether you agree with Plock's conclusions or not,
 >that is most definitely a good thing, and a positive
 >contribution to the debate, especially for those of us who
 >remain fascinated "lurkers".

I'd agree whole heartedly with you sir, I really would, but that
I have this nagging (not completely unsupported) suspicion in my
artist's heart that Mr. Phlock is more interested in the
cessation of the aggregate investigation (That Mr. Friedman has
worked so tirelessly for) than he is a "closer look" you
perceived. Fact is? There's no _real_ looking to begin with, you
see (for very suspicious reasons), and any argument against the
base validity of a very real and historically demonstrable
ufological investigation is _the_ antithesis of what Mr.
Friedman is about, IMO. In hyperbole, Friedman is for a
ufological Manhattan Project and the spirited exploration of the
extra-terrestrial! Pflock champions the militarization of space
and a contrived view on what he labels foolish. Friedman looks
up! Pflock looks over.

 >To paraphrase Stan once again, everyone should avoid attacking
 >the person, and focus instead on the data (rule #3 for
 >debunkers, I think).

With respect, sir, that's pot kettle black, and the results of
living in a glass house.

Looking forward to the documentary, and thank you sir.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
 >~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                           Re: The Roswell Debate

From: Lawrence Fenwick <lawrencefenwick@interactive.rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 12:31:40 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 21:40:02 -0500
Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate


As a long-time ufologist, 48 years, I am amused by the many
comments pro and con the reality of the Roswell case.

What a waste of time and energy!

The only way in which we will ever resolve the debate is if the
U.S. government and its military and intelligence components
reveal the truth. Their obfuscation and disinformation tactics
up to the present have given us no inkling as to when, if ever,
this will occur.

The only way in which the impasse might be eliminated would be
Congressional hearings. Despite the well-meaning work of Dr.
Steven M. Greer and the Disclosure Project, Congress has not
acted.

All we really can do now is be patient.

Some event may trigger disclosure concerning Roswell and other
UFO information from the government's side. Whether it takes the
form of Congressional hearings to do this or not, following this
hypothetical event, I remain hopeful that something will occur.

Those who criticize Dr. Greer and his Project should take a look
in the mirror at what they have done as individuals. I've done
nothing to change the situation myself, even though I've helped
probe over 200 reports, including my own four sightings.

We can investigate cases and compile statistics from now until
Doomsday and nothing will change.  Will all the data and case
discussion be part of an official infomation disclosure? Who
knows? Only group cooperation, timing, and action can make a
difference.

Comments about and constructive criticism of my statement are
welcome.


Larry Fenwick

website:
http://interactive.rogers.com/lawrencefenwick/doc











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 13:05:21 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 21:44:00 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:33:01 +0000

 >Dick,

 >I'll keep my remarks as brief and cheery-minded as possible.

 >You've called for an open, objective investigation of Roswell.
 >(With which I concur.)

 >I assume that means that each witness is to be analyzed and
 >weighed with the same set of scales.

But notice his argument is about "witnesses" who say they know
nothing. He wants them "weighed with the same set of scales" as
those who say they know something. Huh? Normally people who
don't know anything aren't even considered "witnesses."

 >So when I use Kent Lorenzo as an example, it's not to suggest
 >that one Roswell witness who claims nothing untoward happened
 >there should trump two who claimed a spaceship with little
 >bodies crashed. It's to ask where Lorenzo is in all the books,
 >monologues, and videotaped interviews ufology has made over the
 >last several years. Where are all the other eyewitnesses
 >interviewed by Roswell investigators who had nothing
 >extraordinary to say about it?

 >Where, in other words, is the vaunted objectivity and balance?

Where are all the witnesses who reported something remarkable
but are completely missing from the Air Force Roswell report?
Can you find what Gen. Dubose had to say in there, or Gen. Exon?
Where is Jesse Marcel's testimony, or that of his son? Where is
Rickett's testimony or Provost Marshall Easley's?

Where, in other words, is the vaunted objectivity and balance?

 >I realize that "Roswell Witness Says Absolutely Nothing
 >Happened!" doesn't make for much of a headline; but if that's
 >truly half of the story, I sure haven't seen it promoted that
 >way in most of the Roswell material I've read and looked at.

 >How many other Roswell witnesses haven't been heard from because
 >they didn't have any tale to tell?

Probably lots, because they have nothing to say.

 >Lorenzo was, I believe, the
 >second commanding medical officer at the hospital at the time.
 >Had bodies been brought in, he would almost undoubtedly have
 >been aware of them.

You believe? You wouldn't be trying to inflate the credentials
of your witness, would you?

Lorenzo said he was a Captain, U.S. Army Medical Administrative
Corps, and the third-ranking medical officer, not the second. He
described his position thusly: "My primary duty was Medical
Supply Officer for the Base Hospital."

References:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m27-029.shtml
http://www.grassyhill.com/Roswell/Witnesses/CaptKimball.htm

Now explain to us all why the third ranking officer, the medical
supply officer, would "undoubtably have been aware" of any
bodies that had been brought in?

Was he at the base hospital 24/7? Did the man never sleep? Was
he never off-duty?

If people are unaware of something happening, that doesn't mean
it necessarily didn't happen. Most human beings are not
omniscient nor omnipresent. They could conceivably have been in
a position to know, but circumstances may have been such that
they didn't know. E.g., Lorenzo could have been off-duty at the
time and at a completely different part of the base when the
bodies supposedly came in.

 >As near as I can tell, however, Roswell investigators have yet
 >to beat a path to his door.

Kevin Randle said he spoke to Kimball, and Kimball told him he
didn't know anything. This is no different than police
investigators canvassing a neighborhood looking for witnesses
and ignoring people who say they were unaware of anything
happening. It's the people who say they know something or were
involved in some way that you concentrate on.

 >Kent Jeffrey's long report may indeed have had its flaws. But
 >when he says he talked to a number of 509th veterans who said
 >nothing untoward took place, I have to take him at his word.

 >Did
 >fellow ufologists ask him who his contacts were so they could
 >conduct follow up interviews?

When conducting any sort of investigation, the most efficient
use of one's time is spent interviewing in depth people who say
they know something, not those who say they don't. This is a
remarkably simple concept, yet it seems to be way over your
head.

Sometimes even when principals say nothing significant happened,
it can point to exactly the opposite conclusion. A classic case
in point was Sheridan Cavitt who denied for years being involved
or even at Roswell at the time. But then the AF tried to turn
him into a star witness and suddenly he was magically at Roswell
and involved. His testimony was a patchwork of serious internal
contradictions that clearly pointed to him lying on many points,
such as never meeting rancher Brazel or finding a balloon crash
no bigger than his living room. This raised the question as to
why he would need to lie unless he was still trying to hide
something.

What you seem to be ignoring in your typical Stacian rant is
that there are witnesses of merit who have said that something
highly unusual happened at Roswell. Skeptical accounts
frequently ignore such witnesses (e.g. AF Report), yet your
wrath is hypocritically directed against accounts that fail to
mention people who knew nothing.

 >Or was he effectively hounded out of the field?

Jeez, get a grip! Kent Jeffrey took himself out of the field.
Nobody "hounded" him.

 >Ufology's track record on Roswell is pretty self-evident: you
 >can do almost anything and remain a member in good standing -
 >just don't criticize Roswell.

Your Roswell skeptical martyrdom routine is getting pretty darn
boring! It is also typical skepti-bunker hypocrisy. You guys
love to dish it out, but you can't take it. When the criticism
comes back at you, you place yourselves on the side of the
angels and scream persecution.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 13:08:11 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 21:56:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Clark


 >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:31:22 -0500

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:48:37 -0600

 >>>From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>>>Date: 30 Dec 2001 13:24:06 -0800
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>>From: sqquishy@altavista.com
 >>>>Subject: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >Sheehan's involvement in the cases you've mentioned is not at
 >issue. His anecdotal commentary that doesn't appear to fit the
 >facts is certainly open to discussion. I would like to pursue
 >the claim that he went to the Madison building to view UFO
 >information (in a guarded room), which doesn't make a lot of
 >sense. As far as the building itself is concerned, the
 >cornerstone was laid in 1974 and Pres. Ronald Reagan
 >participated in dedication ceremonies on November 20, 1981. I
 >don't seem to recall if Sheehan narrowed down the time frame as
 >to this visit to the Madison, but I think Carter performed the
 >bulk of his inquiry into the subject during his first term,
 >rather than the second. The Madison was only two years into
 >construction when Carter's second term began.

And what second term would that be? Jimmy Carter served one
term, between 1977 and 1981, and was defeated in his re-election
bid by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 Presidential election.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                            'The Missing Times'?

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:42:30 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 21:58:27 -0500
Subject: 'The Missing Times'?


I just came across this web site on my way to looking up
something else:

www.themissingtimes.com

It looks as if it might be an interesting book on the
relationship of the news media to the UFO phenomenon. Is anyone
familiar with it or the author?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 22:00:03 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >held.

 >I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >classified material and security clearances knows that.

<snip>

 >Krandle


Kevin,

Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
we say...incongruous?

I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too willing
to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top Secret to
a complete outsider.

I may be exaggerating a little for rhetorical effect, of course,
but I've always been curious as to how you've managed to
reconcile this apparent contradiction in your mind?

As for saying this tightly knit band wouldn't talk amongst
itself, but apparently had little compunction against talking to
a perfect stranger... well, we all like to have our cake and eat
it, too.

I guess we should be thankful that, when the chips were down and
the press came calling, they really couldn't keep a secret,
after all. Makes you wonder whether or not they served alcohol
at all those reunions, doesn't it?


Dennis Stacy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                    Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Pflock

From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 16:27:04 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 22:05:00 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Pflock


Dick Et Al,

 >Within the next few weeks I will post a notice to the List that
 >my rebuttal is available, and will send an e-mail copy to anyone
 >who is interested off-list. We can air this bit of dirty laundry
 >that way in semi-private.

A good idea, Dick, though I hope you will stick to the facts and
refrain from the temptation to indulge in libelous statements
such as those below. If both of us stick to the facts, then the
air can be cleared. If not... Meanwhile, on advice of counsel,
I'll be supplying you and Fred Whiting with copies of the
relevant correspondence by snail mail.

 >The simple truth is that the set of videotaped interviews with
 >Roswell witnesses were quite unethically 'purloined' by Whiting
 >and Pflock behind the backs of members of the Fund for UFO
 >Research Executive Committee, without either our knowledge or
 >consent. We didn't even know about it until after Whiting had
 >resigned from the Fund and we asked him to return the tapes to
 >us. This was not done in the context of the Fund's support for
 >Pflock's research nor in the time scale claimed by Mr. Pflock,
 >as I hope to demonstrate.

Sigh... Let's hope what follows ends this exchange here and the
discussion will be continued in the semi-private manner Dick has
suggested.

First, my Roswell-research grant from the Fund was approved
in early April 1993.

Second, not long thereafter (proabably early in the summer of
'93; I don't have any documentation to which I can refer at the
moment), Fred Whiting loaned me the Fund's uncut Roswell witness
videotapes for use in my Fund-sponsored work. I have no
knowledge of whether any other Fund officer/board member was
aware of this, but I have no doubt that Fred, who was the Fund's
secretary-treasurer and a board member for something like 14
years, acted well within his authority as the custodian of the
Fund's research materials.

Moreover, can anyone reasonably doubt that it was appropriate
for me to have been given access to these materials, given that
the Fund had given me a grant of several thousand dollars to do
an in-depth investigation? Is it more reasonable to believe that
Dick Hall and the other board members and officers would have
preferred that I do only a sorta-in-depth job?

Third, that I had the tapes and used them during the period I
was doing Fund-sponsored work is demonstrated clearly by the
references in 'Roswell In Perspective', my interim-report
monograph, published by the Fund in June 1994. See, e.g.,
footnote 3 to chapter 1 (p. 24).

Fourth, after I'd finished with the tapes they went into a box
and were stored with the vast quantity of other Roswell
materials I'd compiled. There they sat until I was reminded by
Rob Swiatek, Fred's successor as Fund secretary-treasurer, that
I still had them with a polite request that I return them. It
took me a while to get around to this, for which I have no
excuse by a 'fatal' combination of laziness and being very busy.

Fifth, it's worth noting that, after Fred Whiting resigned his
position with the Fund, it took many months and several
reminders from Fred to his erstwhile Fund colleagues before they
bothered to arrange to collect the Fund files, records, etc., in
his possession. If I recall correctly, and I may not, it was
Fred who pointed out to Rob that I still had the Roswell tapes.

So, okay, already. I'm guilty - of being lazy, too busy, and
less than prompt. So alright, already. Slap the cuffs on, Dick
Tracy!

 >...Let's get on with some constructive exchanges.

Yes, let's - as for example Dick's very interesting UFO evidence
review commission. This is an idea that has real merit.


Cheers and Happy New Year to all,

KARL









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 1

                            Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 14:20:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 22:07:42 -0500
Subject: Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS


Welcome to

                    2  0   0  2
                    the year of
               symmetry 0 0 yrtemmys








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 16:37:20 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 09:41:09 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


List,

Let me "trot" Lorenzo Kent Kimball out one last time. A
Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of
Utah, he died on June 10, 1999. Here's his obit:

http://www.apsanet.org/PS/sept00/kimball.cfm

Those who missed his appearance here can find it archived at:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m27-029.shtml

He was the third-ranking medical officer at Roswell in 1947, not
the second as I stated earlier.

Still, some might find his remarks interesting...

Here's a small excerpt:

[David note-the-snide-tone Rudiak] "So because this one person
saw no unusual activity at the base hospital - while he was on
duty - or when he was on the golf course, or down at the base
swimming hole or drinking hole, we are supposed to conclude that
nothing at all unusual could have happened anywhere on the base
at all hours of the day and night. That makes zero sense.
Kimball, e.g., would have had no clearance to be down at the
flight line or in the hangars, so anything going on down there
would have been strictly off-limits to him."

[Kimball] My response: I am at a loss to understand how you can
state that I had no clearance to the flight line or hangars. The
fact is, I had a Top Secret clearance and was very often on the
flight line and in many of the hangars for a variety of reasons,
including participation in training programs, familiarization
programs, and taking actual flights in different aircraft,
including training missions. Also, staff meetings were held by
Major Comstock for the express purposes of sharing information
about what was going on not only at the hospital but on the base
in general and to discuss any unusual problems. I did not
perform my duties, and there were many, in a vacuum.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                      My Name Is Sue... How Do You Do?

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:25:14 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:15:33 -0500
Subject: My Name Is Sue... How Do You Do?


Dear List, Errol,

On advice of counsel, I am suing everyone on this List who had
called me a name. Any name. Although I am not a litigious
person, I insist on people not calling me names. Those people
who did call me names are all jerks anyway. Probably take Hero
In and other assorted sgurds [there goes that pesky dyslexia
again].

Once, when I was new to this List, some arrogant son of a
pelican prat called me a name. I wanted so much to sue the
bastard, but I thought better of it and decided to have him
killed instead. A-hole!

So, in conclusion, I wish to inform Msrs Old Barf, Young Blood,
Stacey Keesh, (and the person I cannot name) plus many, many
others, that my consiglieri will be in touch with them. Wanna
know who my consiglieri is? Huh? Non-other than the same man who
was consiglieri to the GodFadda. _That_ lawyer. So, you stupid
loons better not call me no names.

And in conclusion number two... this is addressed to you Mr.
Carp... Flarp .. Fleck... whathehellever... if you write posts
on this list and wanna sue me? Well, I'll have you all either
kneecapped or whacked by one of my uncles... all of whom's
members are made.

So back off numbskulls... dopes and other fools .. and no name
calling.

As for me, I shall now resort to the same silly nonsense I have
been listening to for too long, the silliness of Phrock and his
ilk... and this is purely my opinion... stay the hell off this
list of you can't take it. Otherwise, drop the litigious B.S. or
consider another venue. I know of one... it's the "Nya, Nya, I'm
gonna tell your mommy on you!" list. For babies like you.


Jim Mortellaro

Sour, pickled and pissed - I ran out of Gripple too early
tonight and the stores are closed.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

               Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 05:38:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:20:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Goldstein


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>Date: 30 Dec 2001 13:24:06 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: sqquishy@altavista.com
 >>Subject: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>As a part of those studies for the President, Marcia Smith
 >>brought on board Daniel Sheehan... Sheehan reported that Ms.
 >>Smith told him that President elect Carter had requested all the
 >>UFO files, from then Director of Central Intelligence George
 >>Bush, and was told that he as President would have no
 >>need-to-know for this particular subject.

 >Smith appears not to remember it this way.

 >>Sheehan has also reported on many occasions that Marcia Smith
 >>got him access to the classified portions of the USAF Project
 >>Blue Book files, which he was able to view in a basement vault
 >>in the Madison Building in Washington. While viewing these
 >>files, Sheehan reported that he viewed a number of photos of a
 >>crashed flying saucer in a snowbank, being investigated by USAF
 >>members.

 >Oh, the old 'underground vault' and 'crashed saucer photos'
 >again - how many people have we heard jumping on this
 >look-how-important-I-am story?

 >>Marcia Smith knows exactly what the future of space is.
 >>Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that she told the listeners of
 >>NPR.

 >Smith does not appear to remember it this way, that Sheehan is
 >telling it.


Jim,

I would like to know if a statement from Marcia Smith regarding
how she remembers the Carter studies and Sheehan's involvement.
I am in Europe and don't get NPR. How can those who don't get
NPR see her statements regarding the future of space? Can a
transcript be posted here?


Thanks,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                          Re: Dead Aliens - Cameron

From: Cory Cameron <kecksburg@cnwl.igs.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:06:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:26:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Dead Aliens - Cameron


 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 20:25:12 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Dead Aliens

 >>From: Cory Cameron <kecksburg@cnwl.igs.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Dead Aliens
 >>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:46:04 -0500

 >>>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Dead Aliens
 >>>Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:18:48 -0800

 >>>You wrote:

 >>>Hello all.

 >>>In a previous post I brought up the question - did the Alien
 >>>bodies ah, smell, after laying in the hot summer sun of Roswell?

 >>>Apparently they did and were quite fragrant, as in fetid,
 >>>stinkaroo, gagging, etc.

 >>>Brazel and possibly others, commented on the stench. Now the
 >>>next question, even the most jaded pathologist can be overcome
 >>>if the subject is sufficiently 'ripe'. Why in the 'Alien
 >>>Autopsy' isn't anyone (cameraman included) heaving their
 >>>toe-nails out?

 >><snip>

 >>I remember distinctly certain portions of the AA video where it
 >>appears that one of the so-called doctors seems to be breathing
 >>heavily, as if he or she is having difficulty coping with the
 >>situation. Now this doesn't coincide with vomiting, but I
 >>believe there is an argument to be made here.

 >If you're referring to the AA footage other than the hoaxed
 >"tent footage.

 >It's possible to see some movement in the helmet of one on the
 >suits worn by one of the "doctors" that would indicate
 >breathing, but remember the cameraman claims the air supply was
 >fed into these suits from an external source via tubes attached
 >to the suit legs, and though he himself claims he took off his
 >helmet he makes no comment of smells etc. Also if we accept his
 >account as true, _his_ event _is_ _not_ the "classic" Roswell
 >event of early July 1947, but an earlier event in May/June.


Thanks, didn't take the air supply theory into consideration.
Indeed it would tend to explain away the situation.


Regards,

Cory









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 17:57:52 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:38:42 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >I considered writing an article about the "busted" leads which
 >would incorporate all those people we talked to who had nothing
 >to say, but then, really, where is the story? A witness who saw
 >nothing, heard nothing and did nothing is not a witness.


Kevin,

Really? Depends, doesn't it? See Kimball's comments below.

 >>How many other Roswell witnesses haven't been heard from because
 >>they didn't have any tale to tell? Lorenzo was, I believe, the
 >>second commanding medical officer at the hospital at the time.
 >>Had bodies been brought in, he would almost undoubtedly have
 >>been aware of them.

 >This really makes very little sense. Roswell witnesses who had
 >no tale to tell? What then, makes them witnesses? Yes, they
 >might have been assigned to the base, but if not involved in the
 >recovery (Mogul or otherwise), and they have nothing to
 >contribute, then what should we report. I thought we had made it
 >clear that the majority of the soldiers assigned to the base saw
 >nothing and heard very little.

It makes perfect sense, Kevin. If someone wants to insert alien
bodies into the Roswell story, it's logical to drive them
through the base hospital. (Even Glenn Dennis knew that much.)
When someone who was at the hospital at the time says no such
thing happened, it makes him a witness to the counterclaim that
no alien bodies passed through Roswell. I don't see what's so
hard to understand. At the very least, it means you have to find
another path for the bodies. Or explain why a person in position
to know, in fact didn't know.

As Kimball put it: "The primary reason I prepared the web site
on Roswell was to provide what I thought was first hand
information as to what did NOT take place at the Base Hospital
in the summer of 1947."

 >I don't know what a second commanding officer might be other
 >than an executive officer and the information I have, from both the
 >yearbook and the telephone directory suggests that Lorenzo was
 >neither. That doesn't negate what he says, only that he was one of
 >many medical personnel assigned to the base in July 1947.

Here's how Kimball put it: "Although I was 'only' a Captain at
the time, it so happens I was the third ranking officer assigned
to the Base Hospital. The Commander was a Major - Jack Comstock,
we had a Lt. Col. by the name of Harold M. Warne who was our
Dental Surgeon. I was senior to all the Captains assigned by
date of rank. As I noted above my access to the base facilities
was anything but limited." Kimball had a Top Secret clearance.

 >>As near as I can tell, however, Roswell investigators have yet
 >>to beat a path to his door.

 >So, I looked at his website and talked to him on the telephone.
 >I followed up with additional questions and moved on. I reported
 >what he said as it related to Jesse B. Johnson. What more would
 >you have me do?

I don't know. Maybe completely reconsider or disavow the source
who told you (or was it Schmitt) that Johnson conducted the
autopsy of an alien body at the base hospital in the first
place? Give the late Kimball an entry in the next edition of the
Roswell Encyclopedia?

Who knows? The year is young!

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:26:09 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:48:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg


 >Date: 31 Dec 2001 19:21:39 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >Well, Jimmy. Here's your chance to rewrite history. You can
 >correct my distorted version of history based on what Marcia
 >confided to you. The 'Bush told Carter' story is a major tale in
 >Ufology, and even people at the Carter library are aware of it.
 >I will write them and tell them you are about to enlighten the
 >world with the truth.

I was just offering my own evaluation, with future detailed
exposition to be assigned a reasonable priority on my 'to-do'
list. Much of the relevant testimony remains 'not for
publication', since it seems to me those whose names have been
used by Grant Cameron appear to think it's a useless and
non-worthwhile exercise to try and change any minds, and my
arguments that it could be worthwhile were not persuasive. Since
faceless folks on the 'UpDates' mailing List do not dictate my own
prioritization, I can't even predict when I'll be able to make
an effort to successfully persuade the testifiers to do so in
public.

Grant, that leaves you in control of the floor.

 >This neither you, nor I, nor Marcia can say for sure, as none of
 >us was there. The question you and Marcia can resolve is did
 >Marcia obtain access to classified Blue Book files for Mr.
 >Sheehan. If not what is her version of the story.

Marcia Smith is the only one authorized to publish her views on
this question, and if she thinks the issue is too unimportant -
and too argumentative - to enter, I respect her judgment based
on 25 years of productive professional cooperation between us.

 >Which leads to your homework questions:

 >1) Did Marcia bring Sheehan on board to help do a report of UFOs
 > and a report on ETI?

 >2) Did Marcia ask Sheehan to contact the Vatican library for
 > their UFO files?

 >3) Did Marcia get access to classified Blue Book files for Mr.
 > Sheehan?

 >4) What is Marcia's version of the story about what George Bush
 > Sr. replied when asked about UFOs by Jimmy Carter?

 >5) How many times did you talk to Marcia about this, and when
 > were these conversations?

 >6) Most importantly, for those who may read this at the Carter
 > library - where are the files for all these events??

 >Grant Cameron

You seem to seriously misperceive your status vis-a-vis my own
schedule of activities, interests, and priorities. What can you
do to motivate me to want to do any such research along these
lines?


Jim Oberg









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

              Fields of Dreams: Colin Andrews, January 2, 2002

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 02:21:58 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:51:32 -0500
Subject: Fields of Dreams: Colin Andrews, January 2, 2002


FIELDS OF DREAMS
The E-News Service of the Fields of Dreams Webcast Radio Show

http://www.geocities.com/fieldsofdreamsradio

January 1, 2002

_____________________________


NEXT PROGRAM - COLIN ANDREWS, JANUARY 2, 2002


Wednesday, January 2, 2002
Live, 6:00 pm - 7:00 pm PT / 9:00 pm to 10:00 pm ET

Guest: Colin Andrews; well-known leading pioneer in crop circle
research since the early 1980s and founder of Circles Phenomenon
Research International; discussion of latest research findings,
including magnetometer surveys in England, new article 'Crop
Circles: The Human Experience' and new CD-ROM 'Cosmic Artist'.

Fields of Dreams is the premier webcast radio show on the crop
circle phenomenon, with the latest news, reports and interviews
with leading researchers from around the globe, and is part of
the Night Search Paranormal Network:

http://www.nightsearch.net

The program, hosted by Paul Anderson, also founder and director
of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network:

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

is broadcast live the first Wednesday of each month, from 6:00
pm to 7:00 pm PT/9:00 pm to 10:00 pm ET, with the latest
updates, guest researchers and listener call-ins. Listenership
is by subscription at low, affordable rates. The advantage of
this is that all programs on NSPN feature _no_ commercials
unlike other broadcasts. A single subscription provides
listening access to all programs on NSPN for the duration of the
subscription, both live and archived (all shows are archived for
future listening at the subscriber's leisure), featuring
researchers from around the world hosting their own programs on
a wide range of topics in a unique webcasting format. Also
listen for other periodic and breaking updates, including live
reports 'from the field' in the summer and fall for the
Worldwide Report (also included with subscription). Fields of
Dreams is pleased to be part of this new format of
commercial-free internet radio broadcasting!


To Subscribe:

http://nightsearchregistration.net/nspn_pay_options2.html

**Please reference this show when you subscribe, thank you!

Subscription Rates:

One month $7.50, three months $21.00, six months $35.00 or
yearly $77.00 (all prices US $).

To Listen to the Live Broadcasts:

http://nightsearchregistration.net/signonline.htm

Real Player or Windows Media Player are required to listen to
the broadcasts.

For more information:

http://www.nightsearch.net

____________________________


Fields of Dreams is the e-news service of the Fields of
Dreams webcast radio show, providing the latest news and
program updates, sent free to your e-mail.

To subscribe to Fields of Dreams, send a blank e-mail to:
fieldsofdreams-subscribe@topica.com

To unsubscribe from Fields of Dreams, send a blank e-mail to:
fieldsofdreams-unsubscribe@topica.com

Or go to:

http://www.topica.com/lists/fieldsofdreams

Fields of Dreams Archive:
http://www.topica.com/lists/fieldsofdreams/read


Fields of Dreams is the premier webcast radio show on the crop
circle phenomenon, with the latest news, reports and interviews
with leading researchers from around the globe, and is part of
the Night Search Paranormal Network.

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

=A9 Fields of Dreams, 2002









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:18:05 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:54:19 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Gates


 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:22:18 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:12:12 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Poor Kent Lorenzo. Dennis regularly drags him out as his
 >>personal poster boy for Roswell witnesses who supposedly
 >>disprove anything happened. But all the man basically had to say
 >>was , "I wasn't aware of anything happening."


 >David,

 >See my most recent post, prior to this one. Lorenzo Kent
 >Kimball, and others like him, is your problem, not mine.

 >He was the second medical officer in command at Roswell. If
 >bodies had been brought in he would surely have been aware of
 >them. The fact that he wasn't aware of anything happening speaks
 >volumes - you just don't like what you hear.

Dennis,

Hate to mention this, but if you truly understood how government
and classified material is handled you would have realized that
this is not correct.

For example most people would _assume_ that because the Vice
President of the United States is number 2 man so to speak and
he should/would know everything just because of his position.
The fact is that the Vice Presidents only know what they have a
need-to-know. Harry Truman as VP of the US had no knowledge of
the Manhatten project, yet many people might 'assume' that he
should have/would have known or have knowledge just because of
his position. In one of the books on the Stealth project either
Clarence Kelly or Ben Rich, they mentioned that the chain of
command for this highly classified compartmentalized project was
from the Skunk works, to a one Star AF general, to Secretary of
Defense, directly to the President. Supposedly cut out of the
chain on this was the Vice President, Joint Chiefs and a host of
other military people that people would _assume_ would have
knowledge.

The other great myths are just because a person has a 'Top
Secret' security clearance, or is cleared for higher access, in
fact means they are entitled to read and know everything about
the project they are working on. This is totally bogus. Even
with a clearance, you are only allowed to access document that
it is determined that you have a need-to-know.

It is likely that many people at the Roswell air base (including
highly decorated, higher ranking people, had absolutly no
knowledge about what happened because they did not have a
need-to-know and were not told.

Bottom line is just because a miltary person doesn't know,
doesn't mean it didn't happen. Likewise if a military person is
'quiet' about something it may mean he had no knowledge or it
may mean he knew all about it and felt duty bound by his
security clearances.

Also keep in mind that a so called lower ranking person and or
lessor person on the chain of command totem pole may in fact
know much more because they were cleared, where as higher
ranking officers or leaders were not cleared. Just because a
person is or was not cleared for a particular subject doesn't
make the person bad or evil, he or she just didn't have a
need-to-know and was not cleared.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:38:59 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:56:40 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Gates


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >>classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >>expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >>classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >>Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >>compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >>special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >>time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >>event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >>about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >>believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >>who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >>held.

 >>I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >>for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >>earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >>would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >>classified material and security clearances knows that.

 ><snip>

 >>Krandle


 >Kevin,

 >Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
 >we say...incongruous?

 >I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
 >world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
 >of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
 >tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

When the CIA started the recon sat program as a highly
compartmentalized program as I recall only 1500 or so people in
the entire US Government were actually cleared on a need-to-know
basis. Since that time that secret was leaked out here and there
but as a whole it was kept secret.

 >This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
 >Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
 >and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
 >and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too
 >willing to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top
 >Secret to a complete outsider.

When I was working on my Cold War History research I had people
who talked freely about classified things, and yet others who
would get vague and or change the subject once I drifted into an
area that was still classified or that they felt I was in a
still classified area. Some people had no problem talking with a
researcher long after the fact. Others did. One guy I spoke to
told me about what I found out later was a highly classified
project. He told me in two parts and let me 'make the
connection' between the two parts. Because both parts (stand
alone) were not classified _but_ if you mixed them it was highly
classified. He didn't mix them, so he felt he wasn't disclosing
classifed information.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                    Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:54:47 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 12:59:08 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Gates


 >From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 16:27:04 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >Dick Et Al,

 >>Within the next few weeks I will post a notice to the List that
 >>my rebuttal is available, and will send an e-mail copy to anyone
 >>who is interested off-list. We can air this bit of dirty laundry
 >>that way in semi-private.

 >A good idea, Dick, though I hope you will stick to the facts and
 >refrain from the temptation to indulge in libelous statements
 >such as those below. If both of us stick to the facts, then the
 >air can be cleared. If not... Meanwhile, on advice of counsel,
 >I'll be supplying you and Fred Whiting with copies of the
 >relevant correspondence by snail mail.

 >>The simple truth is that the set of videotaped interviews with
 >>Roswell witnesses were quite unethically 'purloined' by Whiting
 >>and Pflock behind the backs of members of the Fund for UFO
 >>Research Executive Committee, without either our knowledge or
 >>consent. We didn't even know about it until after Whiting had
 >>resigned from the Fund and we asked him to return the tapes to
 >>us. This was not done in the context of the Fund's support for
 >>Pflock's research nor in the time scale claimed by Mr. Pflock,
 >>as I hope to demonstrate.

 >Sigh... Let's hope what follows ends this exchange here and the
 >discussion will be continued in the semi-private manner Dick has
 >suggested.

 >First, my Roswell-research grant from the Fund was approved
 >in early April 1993.

 >Second, not long thereafter (proabably early in the summer of
 >'93; I don't have any documentation to which I can refer at the
 >moment), Fred Whiting loaned me the Fund's uncut Roswell witness
 >videotapes for use in my Fund-sponsored work. I have no
 >knowledge of whether any other Fund officer/board member was
 >aware of this, but I have no doubt that Fred, who was the Fund's
 >secretary-treasurer and a board member for something like 14
 >years, acted well within his authority as the custodian of the
 >Fund's research materials.

Of course everybody should realize that just because Fred was an
officers/board member, secretary-treasurer, does not necessarly
mean that he in fact "acted well within his authority." That
remains to be seen. It could have easily required a full vote of
the board to release research material. On the other hand at the
time it may not have mattered to the board and everybody yawned.

I am curious if there was in fact a letter from Fred stating
that he had spoke to the board and they approved.

 >Moreover, can anyone reasonably doubt that it was appropriate
 >for me to have been given access to these materials, given that
 >the Fund had given me a grant of several thousand dollars to do
 >an in-depth investigation? Is it more reasonable to believe that
 >Dick Hall and the other board members and officers would have
 >preferred that I do only a sorta-in-depth job?

Personally I can reasonably doubt. Just because you get a grant
does not mean you automatically have access to any and all
information in the hands of the people giving the grant. Even
without the information a person getting a grant could do an
indepth job.

Wasn't Stan Friedman given a grant by the FUND for research into
the MJ-12 documents? If so was he given full and complete access
to every particle of information and or videos in the hands of
the fund as part of his research?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                                Archive News

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 13:57:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 13:57:53 -0500
Subject: Archive News


This post at The Archive is # 35,000, which averages at just
over 15 messages per day, 365/6 days a year dating back to
1996.

To all of you who've contributed, to what is gradually becoming
the largest archive of its kind on the Web, thanks. It has made
the time and energy investment worthwhile.

To make finding material simpler at the Archive, we've added a
Google keyword search engine toward the bottom of:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/

The most recent posts at the Archive will not be included in
your search until the next time that Google's 'Crawlers' have
visited.

To all readers, a peaceful and prosperous New Year


Errol Bruce-Knapp









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                   Re: Bottom Line on Walter Haut - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:42:46 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:07:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Bottom Line on Walter Haut - Gates


 >From: Wendy Connors <projectsign@worldnet.att.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bottom Line on Walter Haut
 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:27:10 -0700


 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:21:26 EST
 >>UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Bottom Line On Walter Haut

 ><snip>

 >>4) I predict that when the Oral History becomes public all the
 >>researchers who didn't get a chance to view and see the
 >>history will belittle and debunk everything in it for the
 >>usual assortment of reasons, stories and so forth. We will be
 >>treated to tales about how Walter's reasons (which may have
 >>been totally heartfelt by him) were really wrong, misleading
 >>and why he was a total liar.

 >>5) Speculating about the contents of Walt's Oral history
 >>interview is similar to a newspaper speculating and
 >>theorizing about the contents of a classified document,
 >>without actually seeing what was written in the document. The
 >>bottom line is no matter what or who says what, the
 >>information won't be available for awhile.

 ><snip>

 >>While many people seem captivated with the idea of 'Well Walt
 >>didn't tell the story earlier, so all this is age, or
 >>misleading, or tall tale telling.'

 >Robert,

 >Perhaps your thoughts above are the forboding elements yet to
 >come. Many have certainly been vociferous enough already to
 >condemn in half-truths, etc, unshamelessly, in order for the few
 >to pompously prance in their own egotistical foppery in order to
 >convince themselves that they are the masters of that which no
 >other persons should be allowed to contemplate or bear witness.

Hi Wendy,

I truly hope it doesn't happen, but sadly I suspect it will.


 >I am no longer sure the more congregate of crypto-aeronautics
 >deserve that which would be revealed, strictly from the previous
 >assasination of credibility, in regard to knowledge or
 >enlightenment that might be shared.

 >Therefore, I am pulling in my public involvement with
 >crypto-aeronautics and will, from this point forward, keep my
 >work, research and discoveries private. Shared with only the

I wouldn't worry about keeping your discoveries quiet unless the
principles involved (Walt) wishes that material is not
disclosed. At that point I wouldn't even publicly reveal the
name of the person until after whatever time line they set.

 >closest associates I trust. Most of my work and archives will be
 >available publicly only after my death and in the interim, by
 >invitation only. This will be my last post to UFO UpDates.

People are just ignorant in thinking they've 'interviewed
everybody' so "I know everything". They may not know everything
because the person may not choose to reveal everything.

Personally I would keep posting to UpDates....


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:20:14 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:08:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>Date: 30 Dec 2001 13:24:06 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>As a part of those studies for the President, Marcia Smith
 >>brought on board Daniel Sheehan... Sheehan reported that Ms.
 >>Smith told him that President elect Carter had requested all the
 >>UFO files, from then Director of Central Intelligence George
 >>Bush, and was told that he as President would have no
 >>need-to-know for this particular subject.

 >Smith appears not to remember it this way.

This is the impression I have had. As I asked before when this
story surfaced, as _anybody_ including the principles telling or
repeating the story _ever_ gotten any kind of confirmation from
Smith in the form of email, letters or whatever. I suspect what
Smith remembers and what Sheehan remembers are two totally
different storys.

 >>Sheehan has also reported on many occasions that Marcia Smith
 >>got him access to the classified portions of the USAF Project
 >>Blue Book files, which he was able to view in a basement vault
 >>in the Madison Building in Washington. While viewing these
 >>files, Sheehan reported that he viewed a number of photos of a
 >>crashed flying saucer in a snowbank, being investigated by USAF
 >>members.

 >Oh, the old 'underground vault' and 'crashed saucer photos'
 >again - how many people have we heard jumping on this
 >look-how-important-I-am story?

Last I heard Sheehan is backing off this story. If he in fact
is, it will be another one on the Ufological junk heap.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                   Re: Bottom Line On Walter Haut - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:50:18 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:20:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Bottom Line On Walter Haut - Gates



 >Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:42:13 -0600
 >Subject: Bottom Line On Walter Haut
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:21:26 EST
 >>Subject: Bottom Line On Walter Haut
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>The bottom line on Walter Haut, seems to be:

 >>1) Haut gave an Oral history interview where he describes or
 >>discloses certain information that he knew about Roswell
 >>concerning bodies and other things. He has not previously
 >>disclosed them and the reasons for not disclosing them is
 >>also in the Oral History, apparently only available to
 >>researchers _after_ he is dead.

 ><snip>

 >Robert,

 >Hard to argue with the points you've raised.

 >Still, it's curious as to why Haut was interviewed so many times
 >- by numerous leading ufologists yet! - and yet seemingly chose
 >to bear his soul only to Wendy Connors, the details of which are
 >only to be released after his death: no follow up questions
 >permitted.

It could be he felt he could trust Wendy more then any of these
other researchers. As I mentioned he may have some heart felt
reason as to why he has never said anything and to us the reason
may be utterly meaningless. Who knows.

 >Well, maybe this is the right way to handle things... and maybe
 >it isn't.

It apparently was the way he wanted to handle things so it was
the right thing by his standards.

As I recall somebody on the List actually talked to Haut and he
would only give them generalities as opposed to things he has
already said. Point being is he didn't know the person and
probably didn't trust them.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 04:54:14 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:24:15 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >>classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >>expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >>classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >>Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >>compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >>special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >>time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >>event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >>about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >>believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >>who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >>held.

 >>I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >>for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >>earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >>would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >>classified material and security clearances knows that.

...Carrying coal to Newcastle, I know, but as a career officer
(retired) I can concur with Dr. Randle.

 >Kevin,

 >Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
 >we say...incongruous?

 >I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
 >world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
 >of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
 >tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

I believe it likely that even that small handful (given the
probable large number of that handful), if they were a remotely
smart handful at all, would plainly realize "the most classified
secret in the history of the world, the greatest moment in human
life..." flatly _couldn't_ be kept. The trick would be to
release it in such a way that the aggregate communication is
corrupted, or otherwise discredited. In this way they can
confuse and obfuscate the issue, maintain their unctuously
plausible deniability, and hide in plain sight.

 >This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
 >Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
 >and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
 >and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too willing
 >to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top Secret to
 >a complete outsider.

Oh come on! Put yourself in the shoes of the witnesses. You'd
be busting to finally tell this story if you thought it might
finally be safe to do so. And you know what, you paragon of the
rigid and inflexible? You might even be prone to exaggeration of
that story if you were the type of person that, while generally
honest and forthright, was prone to it. This does not invalidate
the core of the story that contains all the enigma, does not
make the individual witness a liar, and does not prove your
case.

 >I may be exaggerating a little for rhetorical effect, of course,
 >but I've always been curious as to how you've managed to
 >reconcile this apparent contradiction in your mind?

That contradiction is entirely of your manufacture. It does not
exist because you have so smoothly proclaimed it so. And your
rhetorical exaggerating is _required_ to have all this shake
down into the neat little piles you arbitrarily require.

 >As for saying this tightly knit band wouldn't talk amongst
 >itself, but apparently had little compunction against talking to
 >a perfect stranger... well, we all like to have our cake and eat
 >it, too.

Remaining are the "red headed captains" that strut and threaten
about something that "never occurred" Remaining are continuing
admissions that 'something' weird occurred at Roswell, and each
new confabulation is stupider than the last. Remaining is the
increasing heat of the noisy negativist's argument of
inexplicable denial when confronted with refutations of these
arguments. Remaining... but others could make better lists, have
been making them all along, and will continue to make them.

 >I guess we should be thankful that, when the chips were down and
 >the press came calling, they really couldn't keep a secret,

...and you wouldn't either, hopefully; some secrets just
shouldn't be kept. Given the astonishing abuses of the black ops
folks, who aren't working for themselves, remember, appeals to
national security, convenient new definitions of patriotism, and
'needed' erosions of our civil rights... et al, take on a whole
new aspect.

 >after all. Makes you wonder whether or not they served alcohol
 >at all those reunions, doesn't it?

Forgetting that that was absolutely uncalled for and remembering
that with your lot _everything_ must go in the triple 'M' box
(Mad, misinformed, or misinforming), drinking alcohol does not
make the aggregate user a liar, does not make that user
hallucinate, and does not drive the user crazy. Ironically, it
seems the person NEEDING a drink is you.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 07:54:27 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:26:57 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 13:05:21 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


David,

Your boorishness is a thing of beauty. It's so dependable and
exquisite that I have no hesitation in recommending it as a
model for would-be boors everywhere.

For a perfect example of same, I hope everyone has gone back and
read the links you posted, one of which I had posted earlier. In
case they haven't, here they are again:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m27-029.shtml
 >http://www.grassyhill.com/Roswell/Witnesses/CaptKimball.htm

Read carefully the Q & A exchange between Rudiak and Kimball
which I arranged, and then tell me who's the Gentleman and who's
the Boor here.

Kimball was willing to cooperate with Roswell investigators. One
would have thought that Rudiak might have been curious and
courteous at a minimum. But when Kimball wouldn't say what
Rudiak wanted to hear, the latter's instincts to shoot the
messenger took over. Notice how easily he slips into his typical
snideness. After Rudiak's second or third allusion to swimming
pools and golf courses, Kimball has understandably had enough
and responds as follows:

"The primary reason I prepared the web site on Roswell was to
provide what I thought was first hand information as to what did
NOT take place at the Base Hospital in the summer of 1947. You
call me a 'pretty minor character [who] personally knew a very
limited amount.' If by this comment you are saying I didn't know
what was or was not going [on] in the base hospital you are dead
wrong. You have belittled me and demeaned me by your gratuitous
remarks about my time at the golf course, swimming pool, and
drinking hole. I like to think I performed my duties well and
conscientiously - at least well enough to be promoted and given
more responsible assignments at higher levels of command and
complete over 20 years of active service."

Elsewhere Kimball says:

"Although I was 'only' a Captain at the time, it so happens I
was the third ranking officer assigned to the Base Hospital. The
Commander was a Major - Jack Comstock, we had a Lt. Col. by the
name of Harold M. Warne who was our Dental Surgeon. I was senior
to all the Captains assigned by date of rank. As I noted above
my access to the base facilities was anything but limited.
[Kimball had a Top Secret clearance.] Your assumption that much
of my time was spent on the golf course or in the swimming pool
is nonsense. I included reference to these activities only to
illustrate that life was pretty normal in the summer of 1947 in
Roswell, New Mexico. We were not obsessed with aliens from outer
space."

Kimball went on to become a Professor of Political Science at
the University of Utah. Rudiak, by all appearances and available
evidence, went on to become a Professional Boor.

When I recently reintroduced Kimball to this List I described
him as the second medical officer in command. I was working from
memory. When I went back and reread his testimony I recognized
my mistake and immediately corrected myself here.

But in Rudiak's world there is no such thing as an innocent
mistake, so naturally I was accused to trying to inflate
Kimball's credentials.

Kimball's credentials speak for themselves, and I hope everyone
will go back and read his original remarks.

Rudiak would have you believe that they are immaterial, when the
exact opposite is true, a concept that continues to sail over
his head. Whether one agrees with them or not, they have to be
considered and weighed in the context of claims made that the
base was in a state of high alert and that alien autopsies were
conducted at the base hospital. Kimball simply says that if
either or both of these events had happened, he would have been
aware of it/them by virtue of his position.

Take them or leave them, but don't totally ignore them, as
Rudiak would have you do. Kimball's remarks are clearly
material, as any court-appointed attorney could tell you.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                      Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Henry

From: Joel Henry <jhenry@visi.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 09:09:47 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:29:22 -0500
Subject: Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Henry


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:42:30 -0600
 >Subject: 'The Missing Times'?
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >I just came across this web site on my way to looking up
 >something else:

 >www.themissingtimes.com

 >It looks as if it might be an interesting book on the
 >relationship of the news media to the UFO phenomenon. Is anyone
 >familiar with it or the author?

I am familiar with Terry Hansen, author of '"The Missing Times'.
Minnesota MUFON had him come last September for a lecture on the
complicity of the media in the UFO coverup. This is an excellent
book on an important element of the UFO coverup.


Joel Henry

Minnesota MUFON FI, Webmaster, Journal Ed.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota MUFON Field Investigator, Minnesota MUFON Journal Editor,
Minnesota MUFON Webmaster
Minnesota MUFON Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~jhenry/index.html








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:36:51 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Randle


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >>classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >>expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >>classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >>Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >>compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >>special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >>time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >>event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >>about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >>believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >>who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >>held.

 >>I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >>for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >>earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >>would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >>classified material and security clearances knows that.

 ><snip>

 >>Krandle


 >Kevin,

 >Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
 >we say...incongruous?

 >I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
 >world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
 >of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
 >tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

 >This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
 >Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
 >and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
 >and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too willing
 >to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top Secret to
 >a complete outsider.

 >I may be exaggerating a little for rhetorical effect, of course,
 >but I've always been curious as to how you've managed to
 >reconcile this apparent contradiction in your mind?

 >As for saying this tightly knit band wouldn't talk amongst
 >itself, but apparently had little compunction against talking to
 >a perfect stranger... well, we all like to have our cake and eat
 >it, too.

 >I guess we should be thankful that, when the chips were down and
 >the press came calling, they really couldn't keep a secret,
 >after all. Makes you wonder whether or not they served alcohol
 >at all those reunions, doesn't it?


 >Dennis Stacy

Dennis -

This is really a very good point and one that I've thought about
quite a bit. The answer, in part, is very simple and in part,
very complex. First, the simple answer. The situation in 1947
was different than it was some thirty or forty years later when
we all began to search from some information. In 1947 these men
were trained in keeping secrets and that they were not supposed
to share classified information with those who were not cleared
to hear it. In, oh let's say, 1990, some of these same men, who
had been out of the service for more than forty years, assumed,
incorrectly, that much of what they knew was no longer
classified and told what the knew. Pappy Henderson, for example,
when he saw an article about the case in one of the supermarket
tabloids, told his wife, "Well, since it's in the newspaper, I
guess I can tell you about it now." His belief that it having
been compromised permitted him to discuss it was, technically,
wrong but it did provide him with an excuse for telling his wife
a secret that, according to what she told me and Stan, he had
been dying for years to tell her.

Others just didn't say much of anything. Patrick Saunders, for
example, when I talked to him, made light of the situation and
talked of (and here I hesitate to mention it only because of the
recent discussions on this list), "Little green men". He meant
it in the most derogatory way, suggesting that nothing had
happened in Roswell, yet, he bought many copies of my books
(thanks Colonel Saunders) and on the flyleaf wrote, "This is the
truth and I never told anybody anything." He sent these to close
friends and family, as a way of suggesting that the core story,
of a crashed object and dead pilots, had some validity. This way
he didn't violate his oath and didn't really reveal anything
himself. I was lucky to get a copy of one of those statements,
sent to me by a friend of Saunders who thought I should see it.

Edwin Easley was always very careful in what he said, telling me
over and over that he had been sworn to secrecy. What he told me
were the things that he didn't see as that important, such as
Mack Brazel being held in the guest house on base, or the
general deployment of his soldiers, but little in the way of
detail about the actual events.

Sheridan Cavitt never revealed much at all, except to tell us
things that were contradictory about his involvement and where
he was in July, 1947. Interestingly, when I asked him what rank
Rickett had been in 1947, Cavitt, said, "Well, our ranks were
classified, but I guess it doesn't matter now," which, of
course, was correct. Since Rickett was retired and would not be
involved in anymore CIC investigations, it didn't matter that I
learned he had been a master sergeant.

And, here, the only time I saw Cavitt get annoyed as he denied
everything, was when I posed a question to him about the field
he had walked and he asked, "Bill Rickett tell you that?"
Rickett told people about what he had seen, and this annoyed the
hell out of Cavitt. Rickett, by the way, should have known
better, but I think, given what had happened to him during his
life, was a little less reluctant to tell what he had seen.

So, it wasn't as if we all showed up at the reunions and these
guys began to spill their guts. It was a process of learning
what went on with little hints here and there. And, there is the
real distinct possibility that some of those who told Kent it
never happened, actually knew that it did, but were following
the dictates of 1947 and keeping the secret, as they were
required to do.

And others didn't talk outside of the family. Melvin Brown, for
example, told his daughters about these activities, but didn't
talk to outsiders about them. We are left with the second-hand
stories because we missed our chance to get the first-hand
tales.

When you boil it down, the Roswell story, as most of us know it,
that has come from military sources, was put together through
multiple interviews with the men involved and their family
members. Many of those military members were reluctant to talk,
told a little bit about their involvement, but might have held
back quite a bit more. I think here that these men just didn't
want to lie to us and they didn't want to violate their oaths,
and said the bare minimum they could. Most of us are basically
honest and when confronted with a situation in which a
bald-faced lie would extract us, try to weasel our way out of
it. We try not to lie without revealing that which we know.
Yeah, I can think of many examples in which people looked us
right in the eye and lied their asses off. But, I think for the
majority, it just wasn't quite that simple.

Cavitt, for example, lied his ass off. Even after he had talked
to Colonel Weaver and they concocted that ridiculous interview
in which Cavitt said he had picked up the balloon with Marcel
(after telling me that he had never been involved in the
recovery of a balloon), told me, after I described what both
Rickett and Marcel said about him, "Well, that sounds like me,
but I wasn't there." Looked me right in the eye and told me a
lie that he had to know would be exposed as a lie in a few
months (or maybe he didn't think the Air Force would publish the
transcript of the interview).

So, it wasn't as if we showed up and these guys all told what
they knew. We got bits and pieces of it and tried to fit it
together into a whole. Sometimes we fit it together wrong and
had to backtrack, trying a new way. Sometimes we caught a break
and learned some very interesting things that we shouldn't have
learned. Pappy Henderson's erroneous conclusion that he could
now talk about it helped. Jesse Marcel, telling his buddies
about this so that the story could be found helped. The hints
from Easley, Saunders, Joe Briley, Walter Haut, and many others
helped. The information from civilian sources such as Bill
Brazel and Sheriff Wilcox's daughters helped. And the crap from
Gerald Anderson, Glenn Dennis, Jim Ragsdale, and a couple of
others certainly sent us in the wrong direction.

This is my complex answer to your simple question. It should
suggest that this wasn't just a process of getting the
information from the first contact, but a long and involved
process which failed more often than not. It all goes back to
the idea of how many we talked to who said they knew nothing or
nothing happened in Roswell. Lorenzo K. Kimball comes to mind
here. He was, not the second commanding officer, but the medical
supply officer. He was not in a position to be involved and had
no special medical knowledge that would have made his
involvement necessary. That he knew nothing actually tells us
nothing about the case (and I believe here, he became involved
because he thought his friend, Jesse B. Johnson was being
maligned... he knew that Johnson wasn't a pathologist as Schmitt
and I had suggested and wanted to set that part of the record
straight). Those who knew nothing were just eliminated, but
there were lots of them. Others provided small hints and others,
such as Marcel and Rickett provided some very detailed
information.*

KRandle

* I am engaging here in what is known as work avoidance. I
should be working on my science fiction novel (Oh, my God,
Randle writes science fiction!) that is due at the end of the
month, rather than answering, at great length, some of these
questions... but hell, this is more fun than working on a novel.

KDR









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:40:46 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:38:15 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Randle


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 16:37:20 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >List,

 >Let me "trot" Lorenzo Kent Kimball out one last time. A
 >Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of
 >Utah, he died on June 10, 1999. Here's his obit:

 >http://www.apsanet.org/PS/sept00/kimball.cfm

  <snip>

 >[Kimball] My response: I am at a loss to understand how you can
 >state that I had no clearance to the flight line or hangars. The
 >fact is, I had a Top Secret clearance and was very often on the
 >flight line and in many of the hangars for a variety of reasons,
 >including participation in training programs, familiarization
 >programs, and taking actual flights in different aircraft,
 >including training missions. Also, staff meetings were held by
 >Major Comstock for the express purposes of sharing information
 >about what was going on not only at the hospital but on the base
 >in general and to discuss any unusual problems. I did not
 >perform my duties, and there were many, in a vacuum.

Dennis, List, all -

Let me make a few observations here. First, a top secret
clearance does not mean automatic clearance to see all top
secret material. There is such a thing as need to know which
disqualifies many who hold top secret clearances from getting
into material that they have no need to know (At the risk of
starting another thread, let me point out that Robert Dean's
claim to have seen the cosmic top secret document about a UFO
crash fails at this point... Dean had no need to know and
shouldn't have seen the document, if it ever existed). So that
fact that Lorenzo had a top secret clearance isn't all that
important.

Second, he said that he was frequently on the flight line and in
the hangars and I really have no doubt about it. The question I
would have asked is if he had a "line" badge that allowed him
access, what restrictions might have been on the line badge, and
if, when he was required for his duties on the flight line of
hangars, if he was escorted by someone else whose line badge
didn't have the same restrictions. Well, I guess that's more
than one question, but the point is that he might have been in
the hangars and on the flight line frequently, but it could also
be that he had to be escorted because to complete his duties did
not require unlimited access to the flight line or the hangars.

Finally, I might point out that meetings held with the commander
of the medical detachment didn't necessarily include everything
that was going on at the base. The recovery of an alien craft,
if that's what happened, could be accomplished without having to
make it known to the medical supply officer, or other members of
the medical staff such as the dentists, or most of the nurses.
It would not be required that these activities be discussed in
front of the full staff, so it is conceivable that Lorenzo might
not have been involved and might not have had any knowledge of
the events.

All of this is just my take on this, based on the information
presented. I asked the questions of Lorenzo that I thought
important, believed his answers to be accurate and truthful, and
found little that was of relevance to the investigation of the
case.

KRandle

(Who really should be working on the novel).









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                      Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:36:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:42:08 -0500
Subject: Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Velez


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:42:30 -0600
 >Subject: 'The Missing Times'?
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >I just came across this web site on my way to looking up
 >something else:

 >www.themissingtimes.com

 >It looks as if it might be an interesting book on the
 >relationship of the news media to the UFO phenomenon. Is anyone
 >familiar with it or the author?

Hi Lan,

Tsk, tsk, you participate in the UFO UpDates forum but you do
not tune in to 'Strange Days... Indeed.' The 'media' side of
this e-mail forum is Errol's weekly UFO program, SDI. Just two
weeks ago Errol replayed a program (that you can download and
listen to at:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

click on program number #166 Terry Hansen) which features the
author of "The Missing Times" Terry Hansen, program host Errol
Bruce-Knapp and myself, contributing editor.

Of all the many programs I have participated in over the years,
I am proudest of having been a part of this one with Terry and
Errol. Give it a listen. It is both informative and an
'eye-opener'. Feel free to comment on it on-List, if you wish.

Try to tune in, or record, 'Strange Days... Indeed' every
Saturday night at 10 pm Eastern, at:

www.cfrb.com

Errol always goes out of his way to secure some of the most
interesting people in ufology today to guest on the program.
SDI is, bar none, one of the very best (dedicated) UFO programs
available anywhere.


Regards,

John Velez,
bi-monthly editor/contributor to, 'Strange Days... Indeed'










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                    Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Deschamps

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:56:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:43:44 -0500
Subject: Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Deschamps


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:42:30 -0600
 >Subject: 'The Missing Times'?
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >I just came across this web site on my way to looking up
 >something else:

 >www.themissingtimes.com

 >It looks as if it might be an interesting book on the
 >relationship of the news media to the UFO phenomenon. Is anyone
 >familiar with it or the author?


Yes...

Errol had Terry Hanson as a guest, twice before already....

Cordially,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:58:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:55:06 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >>classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >>expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >>classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >>Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >>compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >>special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >>time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >>event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >>about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >>believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >>who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >>held.

 >>I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >>for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >>earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >>would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >>classified material and security clearances knows that.

 ><snip>

 >>Krandle


 >Kevin,

 >Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
 >we say...incongruous?

 >I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
 >world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
 >of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
 >tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

 >This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
 >Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
 >and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
 >and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too willing
 >to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top Secret to
 >a complete outsider.

 >I may be exaggerating a little for rhetorical effect, of course,
 >but I've always been curious as to how you've managed to
 >reconcile this apparent contradiction in your mind?

 >As for saying this tightly knit band wouldn't talk amongst
 >itself, but apparently had little compunction against talking to
 >a perfect stranger... well, we all like to have our cake and eat
 >it, too.

 >I guess we should be thankful that, when the chips were down and
 >the press came calling, they really couldn't keep a secret,
 >after all. Makes you wonder whether or not they served alcohol
 >at all those reunions, doesn't it?

 >Dennis Stacy

I must jump in on Kevin's side on this one. Dennis you haven't
done your homework as to how the witnesses were found. I was the
first to talk to many of them. They were not seeking me out. I
was referred to Marcel by a TV station mangager while we were
twiddling our thumbs waiting for a late reporter. He had seen
the newspaper article about Marcel - July 8 PM papers all over -
West of Chicago. When Marcel was in nearby Houma and he began
talking over short wave radio he asked Marcel about it. He was
told nothing. That was in the late 1940s. I was the first to
talk to Haut. I had called the Roswell DR asking for their old
editor - 1978..... Long gone."What do you need? Have an article
here about Walter Haut at the base.... his wife works here!!!."

I located Dubose thru' the West Point Alumni group and called
him. Remember Haut, Marcel, DuBose were all named in the flood
of early articles. I sought the appropriate mortician from an
old Physician; he referred me to one, he referred me to another,
he referred me to Glenn and knew where he was. I got a phone
listing for Bill Brazel a week after his first phone was
installed. There was a great deal of other research... you know
the kind that caused my phone bill to be hundreds of dollars a
month

It appears you don't understand how security works or you
wouldn't have published Kent Jeffrey's long ode to ignorance
about security in the MJ. My 5 page response, requested by Walt,
but not published, is on my web site at:

http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html

for those interested in the facts. Try Crash at Corona for some
facts about how things got rolling.


Stan








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                        Walter Haut In His Own Words

From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:46:08 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:58:04 -0500
Subject: Walter Haut In His Own Words


Fellow List Fiends,

Concerning the assertions being made about Walt Haut claiming to
have had some sort of contemporaneous knowledge of bodies
associated with the Roswell incident:

It's interesting that those advancing Walt as a credible "bodies
witness" seem to think we should simply take their claims about
what Walt has said in his videotaped interview with Wendy
Connors at face value. I fully understand and respect Connors'
commitment to honor Walt's request that their interview not be
made public until after his death. However, while this embargo
remains in place, any claims about what he said have no more
evidentiary substance than rumors and serve only to befog an
already befogged ufological atmosphere.

 From the standpoint of those who care about the facts and truths
of Roswell, Walt's claims should be made public while he's still
around to be questioned about them. It's more than a little
curious that those who are touting Walt's secrecy-cloaked
testimony are seeking to protect Walt from probing questions
while asserting they want every lead examined and followed and
all witnesses questioned while they're still here to question.

It's time to urge Walt to allow his videotaped interview to be
made public and make himself available for questions from
Roswell-savvy researchers from across the spectrum of belief and
hope about the case. After all, he's already permitted the
interview to be shared with certain "friendly" ufologists, and
he seems to have no qualms about discussing his story with
interested acquaintances. "Going public" will not only serve the
interests of Roswell research, but if Walt has any concerns
about retaliation from the Keepers of the Roswell Secret, he
couldn't ask for any better protection than being "out there."

Meanwhile, here's something worth considering when framing
questions for Walt: On July 11, 1990, as part of the Fund for
UFO Research's effort to gather and preserve first-person
testimony from as many Roswell personalities as possible, Fred
Whiting conducted a videotaped interview with Walt Haut. Here is
one of the exchanges that took place during this interview,
which was conducted well before Project Mogul first was
suggested as the source of the "crashed flying saucer" (quoting
from my book Roswell: Inconvenient Facts and the Will to
Believe, p. 233):

"Whiting: Did the colonel [Blanchard] say anything about this
incident shortly after General Ramey's statement? For instance,
in [a] staff meeting?

"Haut: In the next staff meeting, which was about a week
later--I believe we held them at that time every Monday--he made
some comment about our agenda, what we were going to talk about.
I believe after those comments he made some statement to the
effect, 'We sure messed p on that one last week. As a matter of
fact,' he said, 'that outfit that was sending those balloons up
were here on our station. They were from White Sands, and they
were checking the upper atmosphere winds from east to west.'"

Of course, this couldn't have occurred the week after the
incident, as Blanchard was on leave. However, the "Combined
History, 509th Bomb Group and Roswell Army Air Field, 1
September 1947 Through 30 September 1947" includes this entry
for Sept. 10: "Mr. Peoples, Mr. Hackman and First Lieutenant
Thompson from Air Materiel Command arrived on the field to
inspect Air Materiel Command installations and to confer with
Lt. Colonel Briley."

James Peoples was the Project Mogul chief scientist. LTC Briley
was the 509th's group operations officer. Clearly, Peoples and
company were at RAAF to assure that the just-renewed New York
University/Mogul operations at Alamogordo would not lead to any
further misunderstandings.


  -- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 2 Jan 2002 09:54:58 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:02:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 05:38:18 +0100
 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >I would like to know if a statement from Marcia Smith regarding
 >how she remembers the Carter studies and Sheehan's involvement.
 >I am in Europe and don't get NPR. How can those who don't get
 >NPR see her statements regarding the future of space? Can a
 >transcript be posted here?


Josh

Marcia Smith has made no statement regarding her recollection of
events, except to James Oberg. Marcia is in a no-win position,
and I doubt you will see her volunteering to talk any time soon.

The NPR segment with James Oberg and his long-time friend Marcia
Smith is available at:

http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/totn/20011227.totn.02.ram

They do not talk about UFOs, or anything close. They are talking
about the future of space - the space stations, possible Mars
missions and other NASA make work projects.


Grant Cameron

sqquishy@altavista.com

Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                      Re: The Roswell Debate - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:09:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:06:04 -0500
Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate - Meiners


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:05:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Lawrence Fenwick <lawrencefenwick@interactive.rogers.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 12:31:40 -0500 (EST)
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: The Roswell Debate

 >>As a long-time ufologist, 48 years, I am amused by the many
 >>comments pro and con the reality of the Roswell case.

 >>What a waste of time and energy!

 >Dear Larry, List and Errol,

 >I take exception to your position in the most severe manner. If
 >we adopt the same attitude as you suggest for Roswell, then
 >we may as well adopt the same attitude about any past event
 >for which there is minimal evidence. Which is to say, all the
 >events we speak about here.

 >And if my mind is functioning properly (I think it is, as there
 >are no drugs, booze or other substances in my body with the sole
 >possible exception of Prilosec, Labetalol, Provachol and Tylenol
 >- all of which work so hard to correct [in proper order] my
 >stomach acid, blood pressure, cholesterol and the pain in my
 >head from reading to many silly posts here)... where was I? Oh,
 >if my mind is working properly and you are correct about
 >Roswell, then we may as well cash this List in. Errol, tell
 >everyone UpDates is passe'. Larry thinks researching Roswell is
 >a waste of time. Which means so is any other gardamned event.
 >Any one... as they all fit the character of Roswell by Larry's
 >standards.

 >In fact, we should wait until the Government(s) tell us everything
 >they know about UFO's and the abduction experience. Hah!
 >That'll be what? When hell freezes over?

<snip>


List:

I normally do not respond to the List and the various strings
composed on it... but, this time I have to agree with Jim in
what he is saying.

There has been so much cover-up as far as the government is
concerned regarding UFOs, aliens, etc., that if we all sit on
our hands and twizzle, that will be the only thing that gets
done. There is far more that has happened at Roswell and much
still underground... whether it comes up or not isn't going to
be dependent upon what our government does or does not do; but,
instead what we ourselves do.

We just can't sit idly by and wait.....

God help us if we do!


Jean M.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:40:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:07:48 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Clark


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:38:59 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


Robert and Dennis,

 >>This Band of Brothers doesn't know you, Friedman, Schmitt,
 >>Berliner or any other journalist or ufologist from Joe or Adam,
 >>and practically all you've got to do is show up in person, pen
 >>and paper or videocamera in hand, and they seem only too
 >>willing to spill the beans on the world's best kept (sic) Top
 >>Secret to a complete outsider.

 >When I was working on my Cold War History research I had people
 >who talked freely about classified things, and yet others who
 >would get vague and or change the subject once I drifted into an
 >area that was still classified or that they felt I was in a
 >still classified area. Some people had no problem talking with a
 >researcher long after the fact. Others did. One guy I spoke to
 >told me about what I found out later was a highly classified
 >project. He told me in two parts and let me 'make the
 >connection' between the two parts. Because both parts (stand
 >alone) were not classified _but_ if you mixed them it was highly
 >classified. He didn't mix them, so he felt he wasn't disclosing
 >classifed information.

An eminently sane rejoinder to a very strange argument from
Dennis. You could fill a medium-sized library with books written
by journalists, historians, and other researchers who have
unearthed government secrets. In bringing them to light, they
interviewed both persons who wouldn't talk and those who would,
and it is on the strength of the latter's testimony that we know
a whole lot more about 20th Century history, some of it still
formally classified, than we would otherwise.

Where Roswell is concerned, one can argue either way (and any
argument, con or pro, will highlight what it wants to while
relegating to the sidelines what doesn't serve the case). But
Dennis's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say, less
than profound reflection.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                       Need A Number And A 'How Long?'

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:07:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:09:43 -0500
Subject: Need A Number And A 'How Long?'


Hello Fellow List-dwellers,

Does anyone know 'how many' signatures were finally gathered for
the Roswell Declaration/petition? I'd also like to know how
long it took them to accumulate that number of signatures.

Can't find anything useful on the web.  H-e-l-p!  ;)


Regards,

John Velez









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:34:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:13:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 05:38:18 +0100
 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

<snip>

 >I would like to know if a statement from Marcia Smith regarding
 >how she remembers the Carter studies and Sheehan's involvement.
 >I am in Europe and don't get NPR. How can those who don't get
 >NPR see her statements regarding the future of space? Can a
 >transcript be posted here?



Here it is:

National Public Radio (United States)
Audio file of this segment is at:

http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/totn/20011227.totn.02.ram

This segment is from

Talk of the Nation
Thursday, December 27, 2001

What's Next in Space?

Guests:


Dan Goldin

*Former NASA Administrator


James Oberg

*Author of several books about space most recently Star Crossed
Orbits: Inside the U.S.-Russian Space Alliance (McGraw Hill,
2001)

*Former, Space Engineer in Houston, TX (for 22 years-
specialized in NASA space shuttle operations)


Marcia Smith

*Space Policy Analyst, Congressional Research Service (part of
the Library of Congress--provides research and analysis for
members of Congress)

*Former, Executive Director of the U.S. National Commission on Space
(1985-86)


Eric Anderson

*CEO & President, Space Adventures, Arlington, VA (space travel
& tourism company)


It's been a busy year in outer space. The shuttle 'Endeavor'
recently returned from it's 12th trip to the international space
station, 'The Mir' crashed into the Pacific, the first tourist
was launched into space and the military used the GPS in the war
in Afghanistan. On the next Talk of the Nation, Neal Conan talks
with experts about what's planned for space in 2002.


JimO










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 2 Jan 2002 11:45:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:16:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 19:26:09 -0600


 >I was just offering my own evaluation, with future detailed
 >exposition to be assigned a reasonable priority on my 'to-do'
 >list. Much of the relevant testimony remains 'not for
 >publication', since it seems to me those whose names have been
 >used by Grant Cameron appear to think it's a useless and
 >non-worthwhile exercise to try and change any minds, and my
 >arguments that it could be worthwhile were not persuasive. Since
 >faceless folks on the 'UpDates' mailing List do not dictate my own
 >prioritization, I can't even predict when I'll be able to make
 >an effort to successfully persuade the testifiers to do so in
 >public.

 >Grant, that leaves you in control of the floor.

 >Marcia Smith is the only one authorized to publish her views on
 >this question, and if she thinks the issue is too unimportant -
 >and too argumentative - to enter, I respect her judgment based
 >on 25 years of productive professional cooperation between us.

 >You seem to seriously misperceive your status vis-a-vis my own
 >schedule of activities, interests, and priorities. What can you
 >do to motivate me to want to do any such research along these
 >lines?


Gees. This sounds like some funding proposal to spend a few
billion dollars of government money. You could have just said,
"I'm not talking!"

Unique situation. The hopeful top sceptic now knee-deep in the
cover-up himself.


Grant



Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                              Roswell 'Threads'

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:45:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:19:01 -0500
Subject: Roswell 'Threads'


Errol,

The following comes from RPIT member Andrew Lavoie who is not
currently an Updates subscriber but I hope will be in touch with
you shortly to subscribe. I thought the content would be of
interest to those still plugging away at the Roswell Event.

I have Andrew's ok to forward this to the List.

Neil

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


Hello *****,

I recently received a copy of Neil's response to you regarding
Karl's quote and some of the items Neil has pointed to regarding
the inconsistencies between the debris found in Ramey's office
and the radar target explanation. I asked Neil, if he wouldn't
mind me adding an additional response, and he indicated that you
might be interested in some of my results. I hope you don't
mind.

Before I get to far into this, I should tell you who I am. My
name is Andrew Lavoie, from New Brunswick, Canada, and I have
been working with the RPIT team for about a year and a half
analyzing the photos in conjunction with my own research on the
Roswell subject. Working in the engineering field, as an
electronic/mechanical engineering technologist, I was very
skeptical about the whole Roswell Incident and thought of it as
a myth only, that is, until I came across Neil's research.

Most engineering types are natural born skeptics anyway, and we
tend not to believe something unless we can measure it, feel it
or smell it. Well, since we don't have the actual debris in
hand, it would be difficult to analyze the debris using the
latter two methods, but not impossible to measure what we see.
You know the saying that a picture is worth a thousand words,
well a slight variation to this is that a picture can tell us a
very detailed story.

Using state of the art 3-D software, I have been successful at
measuring specific debris items in the photos. One of the items
I choose was the bottom of the stiffener attached to the panel
leaning against Dubose's knee. The reason for choosing this
piece was because I was able to obtain form Professor Moore the
exact dimensions of the stiffeners, right down to the last mm.
Using the width of the carpet strips as a reference point, it
was possible to measure the end of the stiffener.

The results of the stiffener measurement from the photo can be
best explained looking at the attached pics, which comprise of
two sketches, the drawings of which are to a scale of 1:1. Based
on Professor Moore's measurements, as indicated in Sketch #2 and
actual measurements taken from the photograph in Sketch #1, it
is very apparent that the panel with the stiffener cannot
possibly be part of a rawin target made at that period in time.

This type of photo analysis adds support to the growing body of
photo analysis by others indicating that the debris in the FW
photos does not appear to support rawin target debris. That does
not mean that the debris is from a alien space ship. It just
means that the rawin target theory is losing it's credibility.
However, as Neil has indicated, when you study the photos in
detail, there is without doubt, items in the debris which appear
to represent today's technology and not technology that existed
in 1947.

I hope this information was of interest to you, and if you wish
to respond, please do.

Best Regards,

Andrew Lavoie, CET

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

Images referred to can be found at:

http://www.thefortworthphotographs.freeserve.co.uk/images/rdb10.jpg

The stiffener, as it appears in the FW images.


http://www.thefortworthphotographs.freeserve.co.uk/images/ssketch.jpg

Andrew's comparison drawings.


Best Regards

Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:05:03 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:20:31 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Felder


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Pappy Henderson, for example, when he saw an article
 >about the case in one of the supermarket tabloids, told his
 >wife, "Well, since it's in the newspaper, I guess I can tell
 >you about it now." His belief that it having been compromised
 >permitted him to discuss it was, technically, wrong but it did
 >provide him with an excuse for telling his wife a secret that,
 >according to what she told me and Stan, he had been dying
 >for years to tell her.

Just a note in support of the above. I can't speak from any
experience in interviewing any of the Roswell witnesses, but I
can speak from years of experience dealing with elderly and
retired people.

When I lived in Albuquerque, I worked in home health. I had a
large patient roster of retired military personnel. And the
things that those men told me!! Things tended to come out mostly
after I gave them the standard speech about information between
nurse and patient being confidential.

Elderly people tend to reflect on the past events of their life.
And they tend to want to talk about those events. I can fully
believe that witnesses to whatever happened at Roswell in 1947
would, 40 years or more later, would be virtually "busting at
the seams" to tell someone before they left this Earth. I don't
find that motivation hard to believe, or inconsistent with
observed behavior in your basic retired military man.

My two cents, for what it is worth


Bobbie


"The level of civilization of a people can be judged by the social
position of its women." - Domingo Sarmiento

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
--->backwoods of Mississippi
--->USA
--->planet Earth
--->somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:01:34 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:48:08 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 7, Number 1
January 1, 2002
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com

AS I WAS SAYING BEFORE I WAS SO RUDELY INTERRUPTED...

No need to get too wordy about it. As you can see, UFO Roundup
is back. We're starting a new volume in a new year, and we're
hoping for a slightly longer run than we had in 2001. I have a
few more remarks, but I'll save them for the end. Right now, we
have some phenomena to cover.


CESSNA DISAPPEARS IN THE LAKE MICHIGAN TRIANGLE

A small Cessna airplane, with four people aboard, disappeared
over Lake Michigan in early December 2001.

"A search for four people, missing since their small rented
airplane apparently plunged into Lake Michigan on Sunday,"
December 9, 2001, near Wilmette Harbor was suspended shortly
after sundown Monday," December 10, 2001.

"The Coast Guard Group Milwaukee failed to turn up any sign of
the missing single-engine Cessna aircraft that was carrying four
people, including three licensed pilots, from Dayton, Ohio to
Racine, Wisconsin."

"The Coast Guard identified three of the missing as Roger Licht,
61, of Kenosha, Wis. and husband and eife, Adam and Susan
Bukowski, both 20, of Cudahy, Wis. The name of a third man, from
Kenosha, was witheld pending notification of family members."

"A group of officers from the Chicago Police Marine Unit
assisted Coast Guard helicopters and a utility boat in the
572-square-mile search" of Lake Michigan. "Coast Guard Auxiliary
airplanes also participated."

"Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Todd Gatlin said a person could be
expected to survive a few hours in the 45-degree (Fahrenheit)
water depending on the type of clothing worn and the safety
equipment at hand. Early Monday morning,

Gatlin said the reasonable point of survival, given the
best-case scenario, had passed."

"Licht's son Marty said his father was a flight instructor with
30 years' experience."

"Adam Bukowski was a student of Licht's who had recently earned
his pilot's license and was working toward a commercial rating,
which would have allowed him to fly larger, commercial planes,
Marty Licht said."

"The third man was a fellow pilot and a close friend of Licht's,
and he had more than 20 years' of flying experience, Marty Licht
said."

"Officials did not know who was at the controls of the plane at
6:18 p.m. Sunday" December 9, "when it lost contact with a
control tower in Elgin," Illinois. "The investigation has been
turned over to the National Transportation Safety Board."

"Coast Guard Lt. Richard Sundland said the plane was last
spotted on radar at O'Hare International Airport" in Chicago
"just after 6 p.m. Sunday. The plane was three to five miles (5
to 8 kilometers) east of Wilmette Harbor when it began losing
altitude, dropping from 1,500 feet to 300 feet in less than a
minute, Sundland said."

"The four people aboard the plane knew each other and were on a
day trip to the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, according to
officials." (See the Chicago Tribune for December 11, 2001,
"Plane search stops as hope fades," page 7.)

(Editor's Note: This is the latest in a long series of small
aircraft that have vanished without a trace over Lake Michigan.
For more, read The Great Lakes Triangle by Jay Gourley, Fawcett
Gold Medal Books, New York, N.Y., 1977.)


TRIANGULAR UFO SEEN BY A MOTORIST IN OXFORDSHIRE

On Thursday, December 27, 2001, Sarah H. "was driving away from
Wytham village, Oxfordshire, UK" on a two-lane country road
"towards Botley Interchange, the road running parallel to
(Motorway) A34, heading south, at 8:45 p.m."

"The UFO hovered west of the road, remaining in one position,"
Sarah reported, "The UFO was triangular in shape with one light
at each point (corner). It was hovering above Wytham Wood. It
was silent. It hovered for approximately four minutes, no higher
than 200 feet above the trees. Its fuselage was dark."

Sarah added, "I have no pictorial evidence" of the encounter,
and she feels a bit "nervous about being considered a loony."
(Email Form Report)


LUMINOUS UFOs VIDEOTAPED IN SOUTHERN BRAZIL

On Wednesday, December 12, 2001, "a UFO was videotaped over the
city of Araraquara," in the state of Sao Paulo in southern
Brazil. "Several people in the Estadio Ferroviaria in the bairro
(district of) Ponte saw 'an object of great luminosity that
appeared to have little deviation from its course and altitude
as it passed over the city. It disappeared as mysteriously as it
forst appeared.'"

Two days later, on Friday, December 14, 2001, "a UFO was filmed
over the satellite city (suburb) of Samambaia," near Brazil's
national capital of Brasilia, at about 9 p.m. "The object was
described as a brilliant white light making circular maneuvers
in the sky."

News media contacted CINDACTA (Brazil's NORAD--J.T.) but a
spokesman said the agency had seen nothing unudual on their
radar screens. (Muito obrigado a Eustaquio Andrea Patounas por
esos casos.)


MAJOR UFO FLAP REPORTED IN MEXICO CITY

UFOs dominated the skies over Mexico City and its suburbs last
week.

On Saturday, December 15, 2001, at 3 a.m., an AeroMexico Boeing
727 jetliner encountered a glowing UFO over the city of Toluca,
near Mexico City. According to Mexican ufologist Alfonso
Salazar, "The radars of the control towers at the airports in
Toluca and Mexico City detected the intruder at an altitude of
12,000 feet and circling the metropolitan region. An airport
official, using binoculars, described the UFO as 'a circular,
unusual object' which 'caused great excitement among the air
traffic controllers.'"

On Sunday, December 16, 2001, at 7:30 p.m., Pedro Hernandez
grabbed his videocamera and began shooting color footage of a
UFO flying over the small town of Metepec, near Toluca.
According to Hernandez, the UFO "presented bright lights at each
corner of its triangular form. The front (of the UFO) was a
reddish color but without any lights. The UFO darted about
swiftly in the night sky, and we videotaped it for several
seconds before it went flying off in the direction of the
volcano (Mount) Popocatepetl. The object became lost in the haze
of the horizon."

On Monday, December 17, 2001, a UFO "shaped like a sombrero
(hat) and with three protuberances on its upper half was seen by
various eyewitnesses in the area of Tasquena," another suburb of
Mexico City. "According to reports, the UFO flew freely in the
skies above the Distrito Federal, ascending and descending up to
200 meters (660 feet) during a period of ten minutes."

On Tuesday, December 18, 2001, at 10 a.m., "several fiery UFOs
were seen hovering in the skies above Popocatepetl. Witnesses in
Cuernavaca, in the state of Morelos (nearby) said they saw five
gleaming UFOs above the volcano."

According to Mexican ufologist Amado Marquez, "the UFOs moved
about individually, and witnesses identified five of them during
a five-minute viewing period. They were last seen crossing the
sky in a triangular formation."

On Wednesday, December 19, 2001, at 1:20 p.m., eyewitness Javier
Guevara videotaped an oval UFO freely moving through the sky
above Ciudad Nezahualcoyotl," a suburb just east of Mexico City.
"The UFO was described as 'an obscure color and presented a dome
in the center of its upper surface, with a small protuberance on
its lower surface, alternately slowing and accelerating at a
dizzying velocity."

Guevara said he videotaped the UFO for four minutes before it
disappeared into the eastern horizon. (Muchas gracias a Alfonso
Salazar y Eustaquio Andrea Patounas para estas noticias.)


UFO SIGHTED IN YONKERS, N.Y.

On Wednesday, November 28, 2001, at 9:30 p.m., Patrick R. "went
outside for a smoke" at his home in Yonkers, N.Y. when he
spotted "a UFO moving very slowly upward. I just happened to
look up and saw a green line, fairly bright, in a vertical
position.. The line seemed to grow and shrink, on and off. The
amazing part was how thick the cloud cover was that night. It
had to be pretty bright to come through those clouds."

"Anyway, at one point, a plane flying towards the light made it
'go out' or disappear, as we on the ground were able to tell."

"Minutes later, it returned for another interval of maybe five
to ten minutes. Another witness told me it seemed to be 'moving
like a caterpillar...the bottom would get fatter, then it would
get taller, then it would move upward.'"

"I did manage to catch most of the image on my camcorder because
it stayed around so long." (Email Form Report)


FAMILY OBSERVES UFOs IN RED BANKS, MISSISSIPPI

On Friday, December 21, 2001, at 12:30 a.m., Jeremy S. and his
brother "were in the street" in Red Banks, Mississippi
(population 500) "and we saw two bright balls in the sky. The
first two were seen to the north. They looked low. We thought
they were flashlights at first. We ran up the street to get a
closer look."

"When we reached the top of the hill, about 10 bright balls rose
from behind the trees to the east. We watched them move north
and west towards the first two balls we saw. They stopped to
form a motionless triangle, and they held this position for
about ten seconds."

"Then individual UFOs would move out and then back into the
formation in straight lines. This lasted for about 15 seconds.
After this, they all broke formation and moved slowly to the
west. They reached a flashing towers and flew back and forth
near it. They changed their lights from bright to dim about
every 25 seconds. Two dim UFOs flew into a bright UFO and
disappeared within it."

"We ran back and got our father, and we went back to the spot
down the road where we could see the flashing tower. All the
bright-ball-type UFOs were still there. My brother, my father
and myself watched the sky for about five more minutes. When we
got within a mile of the tower, they all started to fly slowly
away in different directions."

Jeremy estimated that the glowing UFOs were "about as high as a
passenger aircraft (30,000 feet) and all were slow-moving."

Red Banks is just north of Highway 78 about 40 miles (64
kilometers) north of Oxford, Miss. (Email Form Report)


A BRIEF WORD FROM YOUR EDITOR:

When I first began the UFO Roundup back in February 1996--a time
which will undoubtedly go down in history as the era of "the
JonBenet Simpson bombing"--I treated it as sort of a lark. It
wasn't until Volume 1, Number 12 that I began to have some idea
of the newsletter's impact on the UFO community not only in the
USA and UK but worldwide.

However, it wasn't until May of 2001, when I was forced to put a
halt to the newsletter because of serious vision problems that I
truly began to realize just how important UFO Roundup has
become. Following the hiatus announcement, I was literally
floored by the number of emails from readers and well-wishers.
It left me stunned, grateful and, most importantly, humbled by
your expressions of thanks and encouragement.

I had the operations in August and October, and my vision has
improved to the extent that I can again do the work of writing
and editing the newsletter. So we are off again in our quest for
information about UFOs, aliens, strange disappearances, vile
vortices, out-of-place animals, time warps, weird paleontology,
lost civilizations, unusual sects, spontaneous combustion, angel
hair and other skyfalls and anomalous phenomena of every kind
catalogued by Fort.

Looks like the Almighty has given me the green light. I only
hope that I prove worthy of the trust you readers have placed in
me.

Join us again next week for more UFO and paranormal news from
all over the planet Earth, and occasionally elsewhere in the
solar system, brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO
Roundup." See you then!

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2002 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 UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine, plus
archives of Filer's Files, Oz Files, and UFO News 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:07:15 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:17:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:20:14 EST
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>Smith appears not to remember it this way.

 >This is the impression I have had. As I asked before when this
 >story surfaced, as _anybody_ including the principles telling or
 >repeating the story _ever_ gotten any kind of confirmation from
 >Smith in the form of email, letters or whatever. I suspect what
 >Smith remembers and what Sheehan remembers are two totally
 >different storys.

Here is the story. Oberg has talked to her about it, but Oberg
dares not speak lest he cast Marcia Smith adrift in a leaky life
boat.

Marcia Smith has never spoken publically on what she told
Sheehan about the Bush/Carter affair, nor about what files she
made available to Daniel Sheehan to view in mid 1977. She has
not spoken publically on the two reports Sheehan claims were
authored for President Carter. Marcia has said NOTHING, despite
an rumors you may have heard.

Daniel Sheehan has spoken many many many times about his
involvement. See story told to MUFON-LA:

http://www.mufonla.com/sheehan.ram


See story told to Jeff Rense:

http://playlist.broadcast.com/makeram.asp?id=546600


See story told to Strange Days... Indeed:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/sdiarchive/sdi093.ra


Also see Strange Days...Indeed Interview Transcript:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/jul/m16-015.shtml

Sheehan told parts of the story to convention in Santa Clara and
in Laughlin Nevada in September 2001. He told his story to Art
Bell, but you have to pay to hear it. I believe Sheehan told his
story at the May 9th Disclosure news conference in Washington.

 >>Oh, the old 'underground vault' and 'crashed saucer photos'
 >>again - how many people have we heard jumping on this
 >>look-how-important-I-am story?

 >Last I heard Sheehan is backing off this story. If he in fact
 >is, it will be another one on the Ufological junk heap.

Sheehan has backed off nothing in his story. He has reservations
about the constant questioning of his story that leads to new
questions about his story. He also had reservations about my
E-mailing Marcia Smith, based I believe, on the tone of my
letter. As far as I am aware, he has never refused an answer to
a question posed to him on this story, in an interview, or
following any lecture he has given.

Grant


Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:40:52 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:22:59 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:58:50 -0400

<snip>

 >I must jump in on Kevin's side on this one. Dennis you haven't
 >done your homework as to how the witnesses were found. I was the
 >first to talk to many of them. They were not seeking me out. I
 >was referred to Marcel by a TV station mangager while we were
 >twiddling our thumbs waiting for a late reporter. He had seen
 >the newspaper article about Marcel - July 8 PM papers all over -
 >West of Chicago. When Marcel was in nearby Houma and he began
 >talking over short wave radio he asked Marcel about it. He was
 >told nothing. That was in the late 1940s. I was the first to
 >talk to Haut. I had called the Roswell DR asking for their old
 >editor - 1978..... Long gone."What do you need? Have an article
 >here about Walter Haut at the base.... his wife works here!!!."

Stan,

Please help yourself, but I think you're kind of missing the
point here. I never suggested that the men of the 509th called
you first, that you and others (assuming you're willing to share
any of the Limelight, of course) didn't seek them out for their
testimony.

My point, which isn't all that subtle, is this:

Time and again you have said that the 509th consisted of
hand-picked men who could keep a secret. Compartmentalization,
need to know, and all that. Yet when you reach them by
telephone, they seem to display little hesitation in being quite
talkative about their experiences.

So which is it: were they tight-lipped or not? You can't have it
both ways.

Nor can you claim that they wouldn't have talked among
themselves at reunions, only to start singing when you gave them
a ring. Why would they share secrets with someone they couldn't
have known from Adam, but not with each other? Maybe this makes
sense to you and Randle, but it doesn't to me. I'm still waiting
to be enlightened.

 >I located Dubose thru' the West Point Alumni group and called
 >him. Remember Haut, Marcel, DuBose were all named in the flood
 >of early articles. I sought the appropriate mortician from an
 >old Physician; he referred me to one, he referred me to
 >another, he referred me to Glenn and knew where he was. I got a
 >phone listing for Bill Brazel a week after his first phone was
 >installed. There was a great deal of other research... you know
 >the kind that caused my phone bill to be hundreds of dollars a
 >month

No one's trying to detract from your accomplishments. I'm asking
a very simple question: why do you think these people sang to
the first researcher that came calling? Figuratively speaking,
of course, and civilians excepted.

 >It appears you don't understand how security works or you
 >wouldn't have published Kent Jeffrey's long ode to ignorance
 >about security in the MJ. My 5 page response, requested by Walt,
 >but not published, is on my web site at:

 >http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html

 >for those interested in the facts. Try Crash at Corona for some
 >facts about how things got rolling.


Hmm, would you mind telling us again how security works in MJ?
Is it anything like it works in the 509th? Which, seemingly, is
not at all.

I'm tempted to say you don't know how human nature works. You
seem to think there's a system that insures security, when
nothing could be further from the truth. It's the system and the
people in it, which means there are no guarantees because no
system can absolutely prohibit Individual behavior.

Exhibit A: 'When Betrayal and Paranoia Are Part of the Job' in
today's NY Times editorial page, about Robert Hanssen's selling
of FBI secrets. According to the author, Tom Mangold, Hanssen
sold his country out not for crass cash, but for "peer
approval".

Exhibit B: Songbirds of the 509th?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:01:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:28:01 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Velez


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 04:54:14 -0600

 >>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >><snip>

 >>>The problem is, if the event took place and it was truly
 >>>classified, then those who were not involved would not be
 >>>expected to know anything about it. You simply do not discuss
 >>>classified material with those who are not cleared to hear it.
 >>>Yes, you can talk all you want about senators and politicians
 >>>compromising classified material, but we're talking about a
 >>>special unit that dealt with highly classified material all the
 >>>time. If a specific pilot was not involved and now claims the
 >>>event didn't happen because, if it had, he would have heard
 >>>about it, that just doesn't wash. No, there is no reason to
 >>>believe that he would have heard about regardless of who he was,
 >>>who his friends were, or what security clearances he might have
 >>>held.

 >>>I speak from experience here. I watched people get into trouble
 >>>for "talking out of school" and we weren't dealing with any
 >>>earth- shattering secrets. This refrain, that had it happened, I
 >>>would have known, is false and anyone who had dealt with
 >>>classified material and security clearances knows that.

 >...Carrying coal to Newcastle, I know, but as a career officer
 >(retired) I can concur with Dr. Randle.

 >>Kevin,

 >>Hasn't this situation ever struck you as, uh, well, a bit, shall
 >>we say...incongruous?

 >>I mean, here's the most classified secret in the history of the
 >>world, the greatest moment in human life -- and only a handful
 >>of dedicated men sworn to secrecy know the truth. How then, pray
 >>tell, did the public at large ever learn of it?

Gentlemen,

Anyone ever hear of the 'newspapers?' As far back as Kenneth
Arnold the 'UFO' phenom has been covered in the press by local
papers and local media. How many times over the years have
people right here on this List quoted from headlines that go as
far back as 50 + years. The 'tradition' is being carried on
today electronically by guys like our own EBK, George Filer, and
Mark Davenport, et al.

_That's_ how the 'people' found out. It had nothing to do with
gubbamint leaks. UFOs have _never_ been a 'secret'. What has
been sorely missing all this time is official confirmation. That
confirmation is the 'Big Secret' that has been successfully kept
for better than half-a-century. And it wasn't always so.

There are documents that show that in the late forties the Army
Air Force did take UFOs seriously. Studied them. Visit the
Project 1947 website, the Black Vault, Bruce Maccabbee's site,
there are UFO-related FOIA released government documents galore
at those sites. I honestly don't know why anyone needs any more
than that to have a tangible connection between the U.S.
government and the study/coveting of UFOs and information that
relates to them.

Sherlock Holmes stated that best place to hide something is
out in the open, in full view. All the gubbamint UFO policy
makers have ever had to do is; to substitute _public_ridicule_
and _private_ coercion_ for _official/public confirmation_.

The rest is history. Our history!

 >I believe it likely that even that small handful (given the
 >probable large number of that handful), if they were a remotely
 >smart handful at all, would plainly realize "the most classified
 >secret in the history of the world, the greatest moment in human
 >life..." flatly _couldn't_ be kept. The trick would be to
 >release it in such a way that the aggregate communication is
 >corrupted, or otherwise discredited. In this way they can
 >confuse and obfuscate the issue, maintain their unctuously
 >plausible deniability, and hide in plain sight.

Amen, and Mr. Lehmberg, Mr. Holmes and I, rest our case in plain
view and in 'official' black ink on paper.  :) We owe a
tremendous debt of gratitude to guys like Stan Freidman and all
the others who have obtained all this documentation at their own
expense, through their own efforts, and dedicated hard work. A
tip of the old 'Hatlo Hat' to them all.  :)


Regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:09:34 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:29:36 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:40:26 -0600

<snip>

 >Where Roswell is concerned, one can argue either way (and any
 >argument, con or pro, will highlight what it wants to while
 >relegating to the sidelines what doesn't serve the case). But
 >Dennis's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say, less
 >than profound reflection.

 >Jerry Clark

Jerry,

I'm not the one arguing that secrets are so easily kept. I think
you have me confused with... Stanton Friedman.

I'm making the same observation you and Gates are: it's patently
obvious that there are all sorts of leakers or willing talkers
out there, else we wouldn't know as much about many things as we
do.

I just want Stan to admit same, and, having done so, lighten up
on his never ending assertion that of course secrets can be
kept, as if the mere presence of rules for secret keeping
insured success.

If it did, no one from the 509th would ever have admitted to
being involved in the recovery of alien bodies. Since they did,
it's patently obvious that having a system of
compartmentalization, need to know, and/or whatever in place is
no guarantee that secrets will remain safe.

It's not really that difficult a concept to grasp. I'm sorry if
it seems to be giving you trouble.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 2

                 Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Velez

From: John <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:11:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:31:29 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Velez


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:01:34 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1

 >Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

 ><Masinaigan@aol.com>
 >==========================

 >UFO ROUNDUP
 >Volume 7, Number 1
 >January 1, 2002
 >Editor: Joseph Trainor

 >http://ufoinfo.com

 >AS I WAS SAYING BEFORE I WAS SO RUDELY INTERRUPTED...

Welcome back Joe! Glad to hear that the old eyeballs are back in
service. ;) Between you and George Filer the UFO community is
kept right up to date on all the latest doings. Your work (and
you) are greatly appreciated by us all.

Congrats on the good news, here's 'looking' at you! ;)

Best,

John Velez









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:36:37 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 02:46:44 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 17:57:52 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 09:15:49 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 ><snip>

 >>I considered writing an article about the "busted" leads which
 >>would incorporate all those people we talked to who had nothing
 >>to say, but then, really, where is the story? A witness who saw
 >>nothing, heard nothing and did nothing is not a witness.


 >Kevin,

 >Really? Depends, doesn't it? See Kimball's comments below.

Hi Dennis, List and others interested -

First, I really am engaging in way too much work avoidance here.
The novel just isn't getting written (but then I'm kinda stuck
for the moment so this isn't all bad).

Yes, it certainly depends, but then again, who wants to read
that Sergeant John Smith, an MP at Roswell said that he heard
nothing about the flying saucer crash. Sergeant Smith, as an MP,
should have been in a position to see, at the very least hear,
something, but he didn't...

Of course, at the other end of the spectrum is Major Edwin
Easley, the provost marshal who hinted that something had
happened. So, now, what do we do? Report that many people on the
base said that nothing happened? Or do we acknowledge that there
are many who saw and heard nothing and concentrate on those who
did see something. Which would be the more productive line of
inquiry?

So, I guess, I fully stipulate that there are hundreds of men
and women who were assigned to the base in 1947 and who knew
nothing about the retrieval, whether a weather balloon, a Mogul
balloon or a space craft.

 >>>How many other Roswell witnesses haven't been heard from because
 >>>they didn't have any tale to tell? Lorenzo was, I believe, the
 >>>second commanding medical officer at the hospital at the time.
 >>>Had bodies been brought in, he would almost undoubtedly have
 >>>been aware of them.

 >>This really makes very little sense. Roswell witnesses who had
 >>no tale to tell? What then, makes them witnesses? Yes, they
 >>might have been assigned to the base, but if not involved in the
 >>recovery (Mogul or otherwise), and they have nothing to
 >>contribute, then what should we report. I thought we had made it
 >>clear that the majority of the soldiers assigned to the base saw
 >>nothing and heard very little.

 >It makes perfect sense, Kevin. If someone wants to insert alien
 >bodies into the Roswell story, it's logical to drive them
 >through the base hospital. (Even Glenn Dennis knew that much.)
 >When someone who was at the hospital at the time says no such
 >thing happened, it makes him a witness to the counterclaim that
 >no alien bodies passed through Roswell. I don't see what's so
 >hard to understand. At the very least, it means you have to find
 >another path for the bodies. Or explain why a person in position
 >to know, in fact didn't know.

Actually, I think we can debate about whether he was in a
position to know because, according to the documentation he was
neither in a command function nor was he a doctor. He held no
position that would have required his expertise, and he
controlled no office that would have been required for anything
to happen at the base hospital. In other words, he could have
been kept out of the loop, tell us seriously and truthfully that
nothing happened, and still be wrong.

 >As Kimball put it: "The primary reason I prepared the web site
 >on Roswell was to provide what I thought was first hand
 >information as to what did NOT take place at the Base Hospital
 >in the summer of 1947."

And to split a rather fine hair here, it might be necessary to
point out that what he reported was his observations but that
they weren't all inclusive. Things could have happened at the
base hospital to which he was not privy. Given his duties and
his expertise, there really is no compelling reason for him to
have been involved in this, especially if it took place over the
July 4 weekend when most everyone would have been celebrating
the 4th. There just is no compelling reason to call in the
medical supply officer even if he was the senior captain in the
hospital.

 >>I don't know what a second commanding officer might be other
 >>than an executive officer and the information I have, from both the
 >>yearbook and the telephone directory suggests that Lorenzo was
 >>neither. That doesn't negate what he says, only that he was one of
 >>many medical personnel assigned to the base in July 1947.

 >Here's how Kimball put it: "Although I was 'only' a Captain at
 >the time, it so happens I was the third ranking officer assigned
 >to the Base Hospital. The Commander was a Major - Jack Comstock,
 >we had a Lt. Col. by the name of Harold M. Warne who was our
 >Dental Surgeon. I was senior to all the Captains assigned by
 >date of rank. As I noted above my access to the base facilities
 >was anything but limited." Kimball had a Top Secret clearance.

All of which is interesting, but irrelevant to the discussion.
He was the medical supply officer which didn't put him into the
command function. That he was the senior captain at the hospital
is interesting but irrelevant. He was not a doctor. While he was
certainly assigned to the base in July, 1947, and certainly in
and out of the hospital, I will note that in 1947 (and contrary
to what Glenn Dennis would have us believe) the base hospital
was a collection of buildings scattered over a couple of acres.
It is conceivable and probably likely that what went on in one
portion of the hospital might not have been known to those in
other buildings in other areas.

And, the fact he had a top secret clearance is also irrelevant
because he would have had to establish a need to know.
Possession of a clearance does not grant access to everything
classified top secret. There were undoubtedly many top secrets
on the base that he didn't have access to because there was no
need to know.

 >>>As near as I can tell, however, Roswell investigators have yet
 >>>to beat a path to his door.

 >>So, I looked at his website and talked to him on the telephone.
 >>I followed up with additional questions and moved on. I reported
 >>what he said as it related to Jesse B. Johnson. What more would
 >>you have me do?

 >I don't know. Maybe completely reconsider or disavow the source
 >who told you (or was it Schmitt) that Johnson conducted the
 >autopsy of an alien body at the base hospital in the first
 >place? Give the late Kimball an entry in the next edition of the
 >Roswell Encyclopedia?

I was attempting not to place blame on this, but it was Schmitt
who said that Johnson was the base pathologist and he knew
because he had looked him up in the Compendium of Medical
Specialties. After Schmitt blew up, I went and looked. It was
quite clear that Johnson had been a pathologist for most of his
medical career, but it was also quite clear that he hadn't taken
the training until after he left the service, a fact Schmitt had
to know but failed to mention. This is what I reported in the
Roswell Encyclopedia and the reason that the entry is still
there.

As for the Encyclopedia, when I submitted it, I was told to cut
80,000 words... yes, eighty thousand. Hell, that's a book in
itself, so some things I had included were left out. And no,
before you ask, there was no entry for Kimball in the original
version but only because he said nothing happened, based on his
observations and I covered what I thought needed covering in the
entry on Johnson.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:07:30 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 02:48:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Oberg


 >Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:07:15 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From:  Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >Here is the story. Oberg has talked to her about it, but Oberg
 >dares not speak lest he cast Marcia Smith adrift in a leaky life
 >boat.

That's your story, and I'm satisfied that on those features
which I'm personally acquainted with, you're just making it up
as you go along, and I see no present value to trying to
influence anybody willing to believe your version, so as I said,
you have the floor.

It may be that people decline to cooperate with you because the
trait of making up things and attributing them to others - which
you have just done in this specific instance - may occur in
other cases too.


Your friend,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                          Filer's Files #01 - 2002

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:50:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 02:57:30 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files #01 - 2002


FILER'S FILES #01-2002 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
January 2, 2002, Majorstar@AOL.COM.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.cewarren.com

HAPPY NEW YEAR

UFOs HAVE BEEN REPORTED in New Jersey, Wisconsin, Minnesota,
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Washington, Canada, Scotland, Belgium,
France and New Zealand. The number of UFO reports dropped as
they have done in recent years during the Holidays. Most of the
December reports occurred on December 1, when a Russian Proton
rocket reentered the atmosphere over the US Middle West.
However, many of the more than 40 sightings did not seem to be
the space debris. There are indications that more than a dozen
UFOs were inside our atmosphere throughout the US and Europe
that night. Sightings in 2001 remain high similar to the year
2000 with more than 2,500 reports each year in the US alone. UFO
reports have steadily increased over the last five years. Most
sightings are reported over the Internet indicating a fairly
high level of sophistication for those able to use the Internet
and find reporting sites. The increase in sightings may be
attributed to the increase in Internet usage. However, the
average report takes thirty minutes to fill out, so those making
the reports are convinced they saw something very unusual and
very important. This filtering process helps rule out hoaxes,
mundane stars, satellites, aircraft and the like.

QUESTIONS FOR SCIENTISTS

Dr. Bruce Coronet sent me a list of questions for scientists to
ponder. Here are a few to ponder.

1. Are scientists and journalists aware that much of the
research staff on a pivotal government-funded study of UFO
evidence - the Condon Committee - resigned or were fired when
they challenged its director's intention to report a
pre-ordained conclusion that all UFO sightings can be explained
in mundane terms?

2. Are scientists and journalists aware that the chief
scientific consultant in the Air Force's Blue Book study of
UFOs later characterized the project as a publicity maneuver to
mollify the public, himself convinced by the evidence he saw
that genuine, unexplained aerospatial phenomena are in our
midst?

3. Are you aware that reports of these two government-funded,
now-discredited studies - the Condon Committee and Project Blue
Book - are the primary reasons why most scientists and
journalists have dismissed UFO evidence as pseudoscience?

4. Are scientists and journalists aware that hundreds of
thoroughly credentialed pilots and military officers have
officially documented sightings of structured craft
demonstrating motions possible only through gravitational
propulsion, and that some of these sightings are accompanied by
radar records?

Editor's Note: I happen to be one who intercepted a UFO at the
request of London Control and had the structured object on my
radar. Four hundred government employees are prepared to
testify before Congress under oath that UFOs are real as part
of the Disclosure Project.

NASA TO SEEK EARTH LIKE PLANETS

Robert Roy Britt reports that NASA's Kepler satellite mission
will study 100,000 stars to search for other potentially
habitable planets. NASA gave the final necessary green light
Friday to the Kepler mission. The space agency also approved
the Dawn mission, which will orbit the two largest asteroids in
our solar system. Kepler will be the first spacecraft devoted
to the search for Earth-sized planets around other stars and an
important step toward finding life elsewhere in our galaxy, if
it exists. Both missions are part of NASA's Discovery program.
The decisions mean the missions will now be funded and planning
and construction can begin. Each is slated for launch in 2006.
The Kepler satellite will orbit the sun and study some 100,000
stars for four years, looking for planets that are similar in
size to Earth and in similar orbits around their stars. Only
planets with orbits in this so-called "habitable zone," where
it is not too hot and not too cold, could have liquid water,
scientists say. And liquid water is seen as a necessary
ingredient for life as we know it. "This will be the first
mission that ought to be able to produce a census of
Earth-sized planets in the habitable zones around other stars,"
said David Morrison, a member of the mission's science working
group at NASA's Ames Research Center, which will oversee the
project. Current ground-based searches typically find only very
large planets that orbit very close to their host stars and
almost certainly could not support life. About 80 of these
so-called extrasolar planets have been found. Thanks to
Space.com and Robert Roy Britt

NEW JERSEY BALLS OF LIGHT

The witness reports, "On Sunday, December 23, 2001, I think I
saw a UFO. I was driving on the Garden State Parkway when I saw
four big, dull balls of light in the sky. I'm pretty sure the
lights were not coming from the ground such as a searchlight,
because I didn't see a line of light coming from the ground.
The lights kept separating and then coming together again. I'm
also pretty sure they were moving in the same direction as our
car because we were driving at about 70 mph for fifteen minutes
and the UFO was right above the car the whole time. I drew a
picture that shows how the lights were moving. Thanks to MUFON
HQ and RabbitSc8

WISCONSIN CYLINDRICAL OBJECT

NEWTON/CLEVELAND -- CHRIS B reports. I was driving to work in
Sheboygan from Manitowoc on December 26, 2001, and as I
approached the wayside on I-43 just north of Cleveland I
spotted what appeared to be an UFO above the wayside. At 6:26
AM all that was visible were three white lights in a row. I
could almost make out the body of the craft, but with it being
early morning visibility was minimal. The object didn't blink
or make any noise that I could hear over the sound of the car
engine and road noise. The object was stationary when I first
saw it and stayed stationary as I drove past to the south. I
would estimate that the object was between 300 to 500 feet in
altitude and was about the height of a radio tower. When I
drove past this area on my way home, I looked for any towers
that I could have mistaken for the object, but there was none
anywhere the object flew that morning. I'm sure there were
other witnesses since the Interstate was full of morning
commuters. Thanks to UFOWisconsin and jenny@ufowisconsin.com
(Jenny Hoppe)
http://www.ufowisconsin.com/county/reports/r2001_1226_manitowoc
.html

MINNESOTA FLYING TRIANGLE

DULUTH -- A large Flying Triangle craft, about four times the
size of a stealth jet was seen while two men were driving north
on Highway 53, thru the northern suburb of Hermantown on March
5, 2001. The Flying Triangle was dark, but the color seemed to
be a gray silver color with a light on each corner and one in
the center from 9:30 to 10:00 PM. The craft crossed the highway
from the left side, moving to the right. It was moving very
slowly, almost hanging over the highway for a while. One of the
men thought that it should be moving faster and be out of site
when compared to commercial planes. It was a little higher than
treetop level, about a block high. They pulled the car over to
the side and stopped to listen. There was no sound coming from
it. It continued drifting slowly until it went past a bunch of
trees and then it suddenly either took off extremely fast or
just disappeared. It was angling in the direction of the Duluth
Air Force Base, which has been officially closed for quite some
time. I think there are Air National Guard fighter jet
operations there now, since the September 11, attack. The
unidentified craft was triangular shaped, except in the back.
It wasn't a straight line like a true triangle, but was
indented some. Thanks to Fire2@cpinternet.com (Bonnie)

ARKANSAS BLUE LIGHT

On Monday, December 24, 2001, at 7:00 AM, Mike was starting to
feed the animals on his farm. He was checking the goats when he
saw a blue Ball of light at tree top level, headed south to
north and then disappear. Mike said, "Almost looked like it was
over our lower farm. I've been busy so this is the only time I
can get this sighting out to you. Thanks to mike
alucard90@webtv.net (mike stephen)

OKLAHOMA NEW YEAR'S EVE SIGHTING...

TULSA - JONES/RIVERSIDE AIRPORT -- Rich Edmunds writes, on
December 31, 2001, I was on the first floor roof of my job
site, taking my regular coffee break checking out the sky as I
often do, when I saw a red light about 30 degrees off the north
horizon. It was moving very slowly to he south at 11:40 PM CST,
At first I thought it was probably a helicopter since I see
them often enough from this location. However, the light did
not blink on and off like even a helicopter light would. It
only flickered when it changed at all. It made no sound that I
could hear and when helicopters are around I do hear them. I
turned away for no more than five seconds and when I looked
back, there was a second light, this one white, not as bright
moving a bit faster from west to east. On a 2-D drawing, it
would have been lower than the red light. It was moving slow
enough and at a position that I have trouble believing that I
would not have seen it before turning my head. It is as if it
came from nowhere (or maybe from the red light)? I watched it
for maybe 30 seconds before it just went out. This got me very
excited. I continued watching the red light as it moved closer
until it was about 45 degrees off the horizon. I noticed that
it was no longer red but more of a copperish orange color. I am
almost positive that it came to a complete stop (it moved so
slow that it was often hard to tell if it was moving at all)
and then began to move easterly for about 30 seconds and then
it suddenly dimmed to the brightness of a dim star and then
went out altogether.

I watched for two more minutes but neither light reappeared. I
then had to go back to my work duties. The moon was nearly
overhead and was behind a thin layer of clouds. It had a slight
ring around it. I could see what I think was the planet Jupiter
with no problems. Now here was a small band of heavier clouds
between the moon and the part of he sky where the lights were
but I am 90% sure that the lights did not disappear due to
clouds. These lights were not satellites as they were much too
bright and I have never seen a red satellite. I don't think I
have ever seen a light act in such a manner. I celebrated my
45th birthday on New Year's Eve and this certainly was a fine
and unexpected present from someone or something. Thanks to
Rich Edmunds Edmunds@kjrh.com

WASHINGTON NEW YEARS EVE UFO

KENNEWICK -- Today is January 1st, 2002, last night at 10:00
PM, K.. Colman along with three adults and three children, got
the opportunity to observe the presence of three unexplainable
lights. He reports, "They put us in nothing short of complete
amazement! I first saw one beautiful light that was traveling
in a somewhat upward yet horizontal direction. It first came
into my view when it rose above the peak of our shop in our
backyard. I quickly went into my home and alerted my family and
friends. We all gathered on the deck of my home and saw in the
sky three beautiful golden colored lights that reminded me of
big gold Christmas bulbs. Each object seemed to be Gold in
color, circular shaped about the size of a quarter, held at
arm's length, with a white light on each one. All three
unidentified objects looked to be identical.

As we watched in amazement they rose to a position almost
straight above us. They moved in a very smooth way, at a very
moderate speed they hovered over head for seven to ten minutes
before the first light suddenly went straight up and
disappeared, just that fast. Then the next light moved to what
looked like the exact place in the sky, and did the same thing.
This light faded away then reappeared and then quickly
disappeared in a straight upward direction. Then, the third
light also moved to the same place in the sky and, it too,
disappeared into the sky in a straight upward direction. It was
simply mystifying, and totally captivating! I have never seen
anything like this in my life it was so exciting, I simply
cannot put it into words how completely awesome this sighting
really was! The kids thought it was cool. However, the four
adults that witnessed these things are just blown away! What a
great experience! We will never forget this New Years
celebration that is for sure! Thanks to K. Coleman
Kt0424@aol.com

SCOTLAND UFOs FILMED

EDINBURGH -- Andrew Hennessey reports that world shattering
footage was shot on a Digicom at night by Steve X an associate
of Russell Penman on Sunday, December 23, 2001. The footage
clearly shows three massive motherships over the estuary beside
the city of Edinburgh, the capital of Scotland. The ships one
half to one mile long [best guess at this time] are elliptical,
clearly curved at the front -- the front terminating in three
giant headlights. The two hours of substantial Digicom footage
clearly show one many windowed, and many layered mothership
issuing forth bright shiny pod shaped ships or beings glowing
white.  Over the course of the two hours -- these ships are
disgorged by the mothership in clear focus as they fly off in
twos or in formation or singularly over the City of Edinburgh
and its suburbs. There are two other ships of similar
configuration further off in the distance. This wonderful
footage is of earth shattering significance, but also comes by
way of several other amazing photographs and other stills by
the Penman 'group.'

This is the clearest evidence I have ever seen that Alien life
has a massive social engineering program for the human race. We
could not clearly see the other two ships doing the same -- as
the light capsules were tiny in proportion. The other two ships
were decloaked simultaneously -- in the drop zone of the
Lothian's. On top of other fabulous daytime footage by Brian
Mac Phee also of the forth valley at Stirling, near Edinburgh.
Central Scotland is again confirmed as one of the hottest
hotspots on the planet. Over the piece, I watched hundreds and
hundreds of little lights fly out of the mothership at all
levels of the structure, sometimes hanging back so the others
could catch up, they flew and scattered in all directions over
the sleepy Capital of Scotland - a city which anciently was
once thought of as a Jerusalem with its seven hills and its
Masonic connections and secrets. We are not alone. Thanks to
Andrew Hennessey pegasus@easynet.co.uk Transformation Studies
Group.

BELGIUM AND FRANCE NEW UFO WAVE

On January 1, 2002, Jeff told me during his radio show about
the considerable upswing in UFO activity in Belgium and France,
including the Flying Black Triangles. (I'm a regular guest on
the Jeff Rense's Radio Show, the first Tuesday of the month.)
Jeff Rense reports that the Flying Triangles are back in
Europe, particularly in Belgium and France! In 1989 and 1990,
the Flying Triangles were reported almost nightly.

In mid-October a young lady reported a UFO in the Avioth area
of northern France. The very dark, square shaped UFO had four
lights, one at each corner. Last month, UFO sightings became
widely reported on the TV news and popular newspapers,
reporting that "A new wave is hitting Belgium." One of the more
popular Belgian papers, "La Derni=E9re Heure" (The Last Hour) on
December 19th featured a detailed report by one of its noted
writers, Gilbert Dupont, about the return of the triangles,
with new reports of blue lighting on the underside of the
craft, as well as orange and yellow. Belgian TV interviewed two
young men in Namur, who reported a very close encounter with a
silver, cylindrical shaped UFO. Triangles are being reported
with varying lighting structures; red, green and blue lights,
as well as UFOs that are orange in color. Many of the Belgian
UFO organizations believe the Flying Triangles are US military
related considering the presence of SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters
Allied Powers Europe), in Brussels, Belgium. The craft cause
vibrations that rattle windows and dishes. They are described
as huge flying buildings, possibly two triangles stuck
together. Thanks to Jeff Rense who has a detailed report on his
web site at Rense.Com.

NEW ZEALAND LARGE PULSATING LIGHT OBSERVED

GISBORNE, NORTH ISLAND -- On December 29, 2001, Lawrence,
writes that I was on our computer at home online, when my wife
who was outside opened our front door and asked me to come and
have a look at something in the sky. As soon as I got outside
it didn't take long to catch sight of the large light overhead
at 7:43 PM. My first reaction to this object in the sky was in
reference to its speed, size, and brightness. Having personally
seen numerous lights in the sky during a UFO flap over
Gisborne, New Zealand in 1976; I knew what we were looking at
in the night sky was unusual. The object/light was larger than
the planet Mars (which was also visible). It was definitely
pulsating in brightness, set against the backdrop of a clear
sky with a full moon to the east. By the time I was called by
my wife Kathleen, the object was directly overhead, and took
between 30 seconds and one minute to disappear over the
southern horizon. I even jumped on top of our fence to watch
the object as long as possible. During the whole time of
observation, the object's speed remained constant and in one
direction. It may not have gone in a perfect straight light
across the night sky, but its direction did not deviate. The
apparent size of the object somehow concerned me. My wife, not
normally interested in things in the sky above, was quite
elated and curious during this observation. To me its varying
brightness caught the eye. I waited during the sighting to see
a color change, but none occurred. However as stated above, its
size stood out compared to other objects; i.e., stars/planets.
I checked up at (heavens-above.com) for other known objects in
the sky at that precise time. Nothing seemed to match this
object we had seen. We would both like to know what such a
bright/large object in the night sky could have been? In
addition, what travels at the speed this thing was doing?
LATITUDE: 38.65S LONGITUDE: 178.00E. Thanks to Chuck Warren -

TEXAS RESEARCHER ASKS FOR HELP

Bill Clark, I'm writing to ask for your comments on some
research I have done, presented in full on my web site at
http://www.inviticus.com. I was dismissed post haste from the
Ph.D. program at the University of Texas at Austin a week ago
(yes it was the day before Christmas), and I believe it is
because of my research into the UFO enigma. I am appealing this
decision, and would appreciate your support by signing the
Guest Book on my web site. My theory is that the UFO's achieve
lighter than air capability by virtue of a chemical derivative
of Freon. You may recall Freon was banned worldwide a few years
ago because it was shown to damage the ozone layer. Yet, Freon
is four times heavier than air ~ how can it make it many miles
into the upper atmosphere to interact with the ozone there? I
believe it does so by virtue of reacting with something in the
air, which then renders it ultra lightweight.

An aircraft, which is not affected by gravity, could do
everything we know UFO's to do. I am an international expert in
energy conservation, and have for many years protested the
Freon Ban because the new "ozone safe" Freon is 25% less
efficient than Freon-12. My efforts have met with such extreme
resistance from the highest authorities in government and in
the engineering societies, that in recent years I have sought
some explanation for their behavior. I believe the banned Freon
is still being manufactured in massive quantities (obviously it
is, because the ozone hole doubles year to year even with the
Ban in effect), and that the government and industry knows
about it, and what it is being used for. I have all the details
on my web site, along with my credentials and other supporting
evidence. I hope you have a chance to visit, and especially to
leave your comments in my Guest Book. Thanks and best wishes
for a wonderful New Year, Bill Clark Lagos Vista, Texas
http://www.inviticus.com, sfoperations@mindspring.com (Bill
Clark, P.E.)

SPIELBERG'S "TAKEN" IS CAST

Michael Moriarity and Eric Close have been cast in The SCI FI
Channel's Taken, from Steven Spielberg and DreamWorks is an
upcoming original miniseries scheduled to air during the fourth
quarter of 2002. The 20-hour miniseries, which started
production in September in Vancouver, weaves together the
stories of three families over three generations and their
roles in the history of alien abductions. In addition to
Moriarity (Law & Order) and Close (Now and Again), the cast
will include Willie Garson, Anton Yelchin, Ryan Hurst, Chad
Morgan, Rob LaBelle, Catherine Dent, Tina Holmes, Steve Burton,
Julie Benz and Joel Gretsch. Principal photography continues
through the end of May 2002. Leslie Bohem wrote all 20 hours of
Taken and production will commence in Vancouver. The miniseries
will interweave the stories of three families and their
experiences with UFO abductions. Burton will play Randall Keys,
a World War II fighter pilot who encounters strange lights in
the night sky while on a mission over Germany. Benz will play
Kate Keys, Randall's wife, who is forced to raise their son
alone as Randall struggles to cope with his abduction
experience. Thanks to Robert Collins.

CANADA INVESTIGATIONS

TORONTO -- Lawrence Fenwick writes, "I've seen five UFOs, three
of which were multiple-observer events." One was seen in broad
daylight in 1996. All were in the city of Toronto. I retain
physical evidence from three UFO incidents, none of which were
from my sightings. One was from northern California, one from
Israel, and another from Don Mills, Ontario, a Toronto suburb.
The California and Israel artifacts came from cases
investigated by police officers. All evidence has been tested
in private or university laboratories. All were declared
non-terrestrial in the way in which the constituent elements
were combined.

This does not eliminate the possibility that some scientific,
intelligence agency and military people working together may be
responsible for most, if not all, abductions, with the use of
mind control techniques and advanced technological devices,
using creatures genetically engineered to appear non-human. The
Don Mills, Ontario item was an implant 1.5 by 1 mm. in size,
consisting primarily of aluminum, titanium, and silicon, all of
which can be used in a transducer, according to an engineer at
Panasonic in Mississauga, Ontario. The implant was removed
surgically in a hospital in 1988 and, after almost immediate
preliminary lab analysis at the University of Toronto, was
analyzed completely at an industrial laboratory in Mississauga.
It had been implanted by some entities that seemed alien. It
was placed in a lady's left earlobe on the night of July 12,
1961, For three years, she heard what she called periodic
buzzing signals "like Morse code" in her left ear. They
gradually faded away. Many years later, she gave lectures about
UFOs, stating that they and the creatures associated with them
were extraterrestrial and meant no harm. Was this propaganda
instilled in her to condition her audience to a particular
point of view? The earlobe was still a bit swollen at the time
investigators from CONFORM were in touch with her in 1986. The
lady passed away in 1992 at age 74. Due to ridicule of the UFO
topic, we call her Betty Stewart. Her son has threatened to sue
me if her real name is published as he is afraid of ridicule in
case anyone reads her real name and finds out he is her son.
Thanks to Lawrence Fenwick
http://interactive.rogers.com/lawrencefenwick/doc

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 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. I feel confident we could go into a
court of law and convince any jury that there are UFOs moving
at high speed around the Earth. Send $25 to: Jeff Challender
2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento, California 95833-2011 Jeff has an
operation his back and is still in pain, we ask you to send
your prayers.

NEW UFO STORE IS NOW OPEN FOR THE HOLIDAYS

The new UFO Store is open on our web site with some of the best
UFO books and paraphernalia available. Help support UFO
research by purchasing through us! Filer's Files is dedicated
to uncovering the truth about UFOs and has sent them out free
since January 1997. Your support is needed to cover expenses,
and when you shop in our store, you get the satisfaction of
quality products, with the knowledge that you have helped
support the search for the truth. Come help our adventure,
while supporting UFO research! Order online today, at
http://www.filersfiles.com/ufostore/index.htm

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 the complete
files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its
editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. 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. Caution,
most of these are initial reports and require further
investigation.

Happy New Year, and may God grant you all your Holiday wishes.

George A. Filer









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                          Secrecy News -- 01/02/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:52:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:03:50 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/02/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 1
January 2, 2002


**      BUSH REJECTS INTELLIGENCE REPORTING REQUIREMENT
**      TRUTH ABOUT WEN HO LEE MAY "NEVER BE KNOWN"
**      PETER LEE ESPIONAGE CASE CRITIQUED
**      CHINA IN SPACE
**      AL-ZAWAHIRI'S "LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT"
**      UK RECORDS RELEASE ANNOUNCED
**      CONTROLS ON PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS DENOUNCED


BUSH REJECTS INTELLIGENCE REPORTING REQUIREMENT

In the latest assertion of executive branch predominance,
President Bush dismissed a provision in the FY 2002 intelligence
authorization bill that would require written reports to
Congress of "significant anticipated intelligence activities"
and "significant intelligence failures."

In a December 28 signing statement, the President said that the
new requirement "falls short of the standards of comity and
flexibility that should govern the relationship between the
executive and legislative branches on sensitive intelligence
matters...."

He said he would interpret the law "in a manner consistent with
the President's constitutional authority to withhold information
the disclosure of which could impair foreign relations, the
national security, the deliberative processes of the Executive,
or the performance of the Executive's constitutional duties."

See the President's statement here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2001/12/wh122801.html

Intelligence community procedures for granting legislative
branch access to intelligence information are set forth in
Section 8.0 of Director of Central Intelligence Directive 1/19,
"Security Policy for Sensitive Compartmented Information and
Security Policy Manual":

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/dcid1-19.html#leg


TRUTH ABOUT WEN HO LEE MAY "NEVER BE KNOWN"

A newly published Senate report on the Wen Ho Lee espionage case
found fault with all concerned and concluded that "the entire
truth will likely never be known."

"As a consequence of an inept investigation, the government has
lost the credibility to claim that its version of events is the
absolute truth," the report stated.

Moreover, "Some of the most controversial and misguided steps in
the case appear to have been motivated more by a desire to
protect the affected agency's image than the national security."

On the other hand, "Dr. Lee also lacks the credibility to tell
the definitive tale of this case: he repeatedly lied to
investigators, created his own personal nuclear weapons design
library without proper authority, copied nuclear secrets to an
unclassified computer system accessible from the Internet, and
passed up several opportunities to turn his tape collection over
to the government."

The report was prepared for the Subcommittee on Department of
Justice Oversight of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  It was
cleared for public release by the FBI on December 19 and entered
into the Congressional Record on December 20 by Sen. Arlen
Specter, who chaired the Subcommittee.

Unlike the "Bellows Report" on the Lee case, which was released
last month in heavily censored form, the Senate report
encompasses the full duration of the controversial case, up to
and including its conclusion in a September 2000 plea agreement.

While the report in large part duplicates what has been previously been
reported, it also includes some provocative new information and
analysis.

The new report provides the fullest account yet of Wen Ho Lee's
disputed December 1998 polygraph test, which he passed,
according to an Energy Department contractor, or did not pass,
according to the FBI.  Lee "definitely did not pass," the report
concludes somewhat peremptorily, finding that the questions
posed during the test were insufficiently precise.

The report also includes new details of Lee's nine-month
pre-trial confinement under arduous conditions and states that
the government's conduct of the case "raises questions as to
whether the harsh tactics were intended to coerce a confession."

Although Wen Ho Lee's "onerous" incarceration "has not been
adequately explained," the subcommittee took pains to rebut
allegations that the conduct of the case was motivated by racial
or ethnic bias.

Finally, the report speculates at length as to what might have
occurred if the Wen Ho Lee case had actually proceeded to trial.

"Although the government would likely have won a conviction
because many elements of the charged conduct were not disputed
-- Dr. Lee could not credibly deny that he had made the tapes
containing vast quantities of classified nuclear weapons data --
this would not have been an easy case," according to the report.

The "Report on the Government's Handling of the Investigation
and Prosecution of Dr. Wen Ho Lee" may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_rpt/whl.html

The Bellows Report on the Wen Ho Lee case, as released in
declassified form, is now available in large PDF files on the
Justice Department web site here:

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/readingroom/bellows.htm

Two new books on the case are to be published this month: Wen Ho
Lee's own "My Country Versus Me" and "A Convenient Spy" by
reporters Ian Hoffman and Dan Stober.

A federal appeals court on December 28 reinstated former
Department of Energy official Notra Trulock's claim that the FBI
illegally seized his computer files in retaliation for a
magazine article he wrote critical of the FBI's handling of
Chinese espionage.  See the decision here:

http://cryptome.org/trulock-v-fbi.htm


PETER LEE ESPIONAGE CASE CRITIQUED

Another Senate report that critiqued the investigation and
prosecution of Dr. Peter Lee was also released on December 20 by
Senator Arlen Specter.  Peter Lee confessed in 1997 to
transferring classified nuclear weapons information and
anti-submarine warfare information to China.

"Dr. Lee's confessed crimes caused serious harm to U.S. national
security, yet he was offered a plea bargain which resulted in a
sentence amounting to one year in a half-way house, 3,000 hours
of community service and a $20,000 fine," the Senate report
stated.

"Considering the magnitude of Dr. Lee's offenses and his failure
to adhere to the terms of the plea agreement which called for
complete cooperation and truthfulness, the interests of the
United States were not well served by this outcome," according
to the report.

The case is analyzed in detail in "Report on the Investigation
of Dr. Peter Lee," which may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_rpt/peterlee.html


CHINA IN SPACE

"It won't be long before Chinese are walking on the moon,"
according to a December 3 article in Jiefangjun Bao, the
People's Liberation Army daily.

Under its latest Five Year Plan, China will undertake
"preliminary research on manned flight and lunar exploration,"
among a variety of other ambitious space programs.  See:

http://www.fas.org/spp/guide/china/bjb031201.html


AL-ZAWAHIRI'S "LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT"

The memoirs of Ayman al-Zawahiri, leader of Egyptian al-Jihad
and chief lieutenant to Osama bin Laden, were recently excerpted
and serialized in the London-based Arabic paper A-Sharq
Al-Awsat.

The volume, entitled "Knights Under the Prophet's Banner," is a
rather tiresome compendium of personal reminiscences and
exhortations to battle against the infidel. But it also provides
occasional insights into the fanatic mind.

The published excerpts, as translated by the CIA's Foreign
Broadcast Information Service, may be found here (under "Sources
and Resources"):

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/jihad.htm


UK RECORDS RELEASE ANNOUNCED

The British Government's Public Records Office announced its
annual unsealing of 30 year old records on January 1.

The meager highlights of the Public Records of 1971 are
described here:

http://www.pro.gov.uk/releases/nyo2002/default.htm


CONTROLS ON PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS DENOUNCED

The new Bush executive order that curtails public access to
presidential records was critically examined by historian
Stanley Kutler in a Chicago Tribune op-ed on January 2.

"If his action stands, Bush will have substantially shut down
historical research of recent presidents," wrote Kutler, who is
one of the plaintiffs in a pending lawsuit that seeks to
overturn the executive order.  See:

http://chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-0201020122jan02.story


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, email your request
to <saftergood@fas.org>.

Secrecy News is archived at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:18:31 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:05:50 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:18:05 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Dennis,

 >Hate to mention this, but if you truly understood how government
 >and classified material is handled you would have realized that
 >this is not correct.

 >For example most people would _assume_ that because the Vice
 >President of the United States is number 2 man so to speak and
 >he should/would know everything just because of his position.
 >The fact is that the Vice Presidents only know what they have a
 >need-to-know. Harry Truman as VP of the US had no knowledge of
 >the Manhatten project, yet many people might 'assume' that he
 >should have/would have known or have knowledge just because of
 >his position. In one of the books on the Stealth project either
 >Clarence Kelly or Ben Rich, they mentioned that the chain of
 >command for this highly classified compartmentalized project was
 >from the Skunk works, to a one Star AF general, to Secretary of
 >Defense, directly to the President. Supposedly cut out of the
 >chain on this was the Vice President, Joint Chiefs and a host of
 >other military people that people would _assume_ would have
 >knowledge.


Robert,

Every situation is different. James Nance Garner, Truman's
predecessor, famously referred to the Vice-Presidency as not
being "worth a bucket of warm spit." Which it pretty much wasn't
in 1947.

Do you seriously think Dick Cheney is in a similar position
today? Out of the loop, as it were?

 >The other great myths are just because a person has a 'Top
 >Secret' security clearance, or is cleared for higher access, in
 >fact means they are entitled to read and know everything about
 >the project they are working on. This is totally bogus. Even
 >with a clearance, you are only allowed to access document that
 >it is determined that you have a need-to-know.

No one said anything about Kimball reading documents. Do you
think that if Roswell had been on high alert and that alien
bodies were brought on base to be autopsied that only one or two
medical personnel would have been called out to handle the
situation?

Your examples are abstract ones that have nothing to do with a
fluid situation on the ground, unless you want to come up with
some reason as to why Kimball wouldn't have been included in any
significant call up of personnel. Any guesses?

Remember, we're not talking about him having access to documents
after the fact. We're talking about why he wasn't involved at
the time if such a dire situation was indeed truly unfolding.

 >It is likely that many people at the Roswell air base
(including >highly decorated, higher ranking people, had
absolutly no >knowledge about what happened because they did not
have a >need-to-know and were not told.

 >Bottom line is just because a miltary person doesn't know,
 >doesn't mean it didn't happen. Likewise if a military person is
 >'quiet' about something it may mean he had no knowledge or it
 >may mean he knew all about it and felt duty bound by his
 >security clearances.

I have never said or suggested that because Kimball didn't have
any knowledge of alien autopsies that bodies were ipso facto
never recovered at Roswell. What I have maintained all along is
that his testimony needs to be considered in the context of
claims to the contrary. I hate to keep repeating myself, but
what is so difficult to understand here?

 >Also keep in mind that a so called lower ranking person and or
 >lessor person on the chain of command totem pole may in fact
 >know much more because they were cleared, where as higher
 >ranking officers or leaders were not cleared. Just because a
 >person is or was not cleared for a particular subject doesn't
 >make the person bad or evil, he or she just didn't have a
 >need-to-know and was not cleared.


Understood and kept in mind. But again, we're not talking about
a hypothetical, post facto situation here regarding the reading
of classified documents after the fact. We're talking about
breaking events. When Truman was swept up by the latter, he was
properly and promptly notified of the existence of the atomic
bomb.

If Roswell had gone on high alert and several alien bodies had
been brought to the base hospital, don't you think there's at
least a possibility -- if not a downright likelihood -- that
Kimball would have been made aware of same, indeed, alerted to
participate?

And if not, why not? That's pretty much all you need concern
yourself with in this specific context.

Vice-president Truman ain't got nothing to do with it.

And as Jerry Clark would say, it's Manhattan Project, not
Manhatten.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:31:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:15:07 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:40:52 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:58:50 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>I must jump in on Kevin's side on this one. Dennis you haven't
 >>done your homework as to how the witnesses were found. I was the
 >>first to talk to many of them. They were not seeking me out. I
 >>was referred to Marcel by a TV station mangager while we were
 >>twiddling our thumbs waiting for a late reporter. He had seen
 >>the newspaper article about Marcel - July 8 PM papers all over -
 >>West of Chicago. When Marcel was in nearby Houma and he began
 >>talking over short wave radio he asked Marcel about it. He was
 >>told nothing. That was in the late 1940s. I was the first to
 >>talk to Haut. I had called the Roswell DR asking for their old
 >>editor - 1978..... Long gone."What do you need? Have an article
 >>here about Walter Haut at the base.... his wife works here!!!."

 >Stan,

 >Please help yourself, but I think you're kind of missing the
 >point here. I never suggested that the men of the 509th called
 >you first, that you and others (assuming you're willing to share
 >any of the Limelight, of course) didn't seek them out for their
 >testimony.

I must again point out that Haut, Marcel, DuBose, Ramey,
Blanchard were all mentioned in July 1947 articles about a
crashed saucer. Blanchard died in 1966. Ramey after that. The
others could hardly deny they had been involved. None of them
were in command positions about such an event. I can see no
reason why they would have been informed about the disposition
of the wreckage, the bodies or anything else. They each talked
(at least 30 years later) about their roles in the story for the
brief time they were involved. Whether they each kept back some
or a lot of information we have no way of knowing.

I had located Cavitt, way back when. His name had not appeared
in the press coverage. He lied, misrepresented, etc for years. I
had located Easley. He wouldn't respond to my written material,
and, as Kevin has noted, was very careful about what he said. He
could hardly deny, because of his position (unlike Kimball)
being involved at all. He, too, had not been named publicly and
would have, like Cavitt, had an important role to play.

 >My point, which isn't all that subtle, is this:

 >Time and again you have said that the 509th consisted of
 >hand-picked men who could keep a secret. Compartmentalization,
 >need to know, and all that. Yet when you reach them by
 >telephone, they seem to display little hesitation in being quite
 >talkative about their experiences.

 >So which is it: were they tight-lipped or not? You can't have it
 >both ways.

Of course we can. They could hardly deny being involved. Marcel
wouldn't tell the TV guy anything back in the late 1940s.
Remember none of these guys knew much if anything about what
Bill Moore, Kevin, myself and others were digging up from other
people. None when first talked to expected Roswell to become a
household name.

Irving Newton, also mentioned in the early stories, could hardly
deny involvement. But he sure lied, as did Cavitt, after being
briefed by Col. Weaver et al. I see no reason to think they were
not very careful about what they said about their day to
activities involving nuclear weapons, target locations etc.
Flying saucer wreckage hardly had any relveance to their day to
day activities.

As I mentioned in my comments about Kent Jeffrey, B-29 pilots
hardly had a need-to-know about flying saucer wreckage. It would
not make them better pilots. Most secrets come out long before
thirty years. Pappy had indeed told his WW 2 Bombardier for 30
missions over Europe about it at a reunion in the early 1980s.
He had told his close friend Dr. John Kromshroeder, on John's
honor as a former navy officer, in the late 1970s.

General Exon told me that he did not have a need to know for
everything ahppening at WPAF even when he was base commander. I
mentioned that Officer Madson had one job at WPAF that was so
classified his own boss didn't know about it..

Don't forget about the guys who were kciked out of the 509th
before they left for Tinian becaus they talked about working on
some secret project at bars where government spies heard them.
None of them even knew it involved nuclear weapons. But their
being shipped out was a good lesson for those left in the
outfit.

 >Nor can you claim that they wouldn't have talked among
 >themselves at reunions, only to start singing when you gave them
 >a ring. Why would they share secrets with someone they couldn't
 >have known from Adam, but not with each other? Maybe this makes
 >sense to you and Randle, but it doesn't to me. I'm still waiting
 >to be enlightened.

Who says any of them attended reunions? Their limited
involvement was already known if they had been at reunions. I
was at the 50th reunion of the 509th in Wendover. None of our
Roswell guys were.

 >>I located Dubose thru' the West Point Alumni group and called
 >>him. Remember Haut, Marcel, DuBose were all named in the flood
 >>of early articles. I sought the appropriate mortician from an
 >>old Physician; he referred me to one, he referred me to
 >>another, he referred me to Glenn and knew where he was. I got a
 >>phone listing for Bill Brazel a week after his first phone was
 >>installed. There was a great deal of other research... you know
 >>the kind that caused my phone bill to be hundreds of dollars a
 >>month

 >No one's trying to detract from your accomplishments. I'm asking
 >a very simple question: why do you think these people sang to
 >the first researcher that came calling? Figuratively speaking,
 >of course, and civilians excepted.

Just what singing did they do? It was many months after I talked
to Marcel and then Vern and Jean Maltais before Bill Moore
talked to Hughie Green's family to find the date when he heard
radio broadcasts while driving across the country. (Green's
article was in FSR)

Bill then went to the Periodicals Dept. at U. of MN and found
the many stories. This gave an independent verification to the
Marcel story and provided us with many names. Loren Gross
informed us of something he found about a Sheridan Cavitt, that
enabled us to find him. Of course I could suggest that my
background credentials (nuclear physicist who had worked on many
classified programs) and my persuasive manner immediately
convinced them to try hard to recall events of a long time ago.

Kevin's background in military intelligence probably helped
convince some people to talk a bit to him. It obviously didn't
convince Cavitt. Mrs. Cavitt quietly told Bill Moore while Cav
was out of the room that "he was told not to say anything".
Bill had mentioned finding Cavitt at MUFON in Toronto before he
had spoken to him... No choir...

 >>It appears you don't understand how security works or you
 >>wouldn't have published Kent Jeffrey's long ode to ignorance
 >>about security in the MJ. My 5 page response, requested by Walt,
 >>but not published, is on my web site at:

 >>http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfpage.html

 >>for those interested in the facts. Try Crash at Corona for some
 >>facts about how things got rolling.

 >Hmm, would you mind telling us again how security works in MJ?
 >Is it anything like it works in the 509th? Which, seemingly, is
 >not at all.

Again there is no basis for saying security didn't work in the
509th. Just how many articles were there, aside from Frank
Edwards' grossly distorted version, about Roswell before the
publication of The Roswell Incident in 1980? It didn't take that
long to get out the code breaking work at Bletchley Park.

 >I'm tempted to say you don't know how human nature works. You
 >seem to think there's a system that insures security, when
 >nothing could be further from the truth. It's the system and the
 >people in it, which means there are no guarantees because no
 >system can absolutely prohibit Individual behavior.

Nobody said there were any guarantees. That the DCI had a black
budget of $26.6 Billion in 1996 indicates that security works
pretty well. Yes there have been a number of spies who sold out.
Pretty tiny fraction of those who had access.

 >Exhibit A: 'When Betrayal and Paranoia Are Part of the Job' in
 >today's NY Times editorial page, about Robert Hanssen's selling
 >of FBI secrets. According to the author, Tom Mangold, Hanssen
 >sold his country out not for crass cash, but for "peer
 >approval".

 >Exhibit B: Songbirds of the 509th?

Haven't seen any concert announcements.Nor many documents
released other than from the FBI in the 1970s no less.. thanks
to Bruce Maccabee

 >Dennis

By the way did you read my piece on Kent Jeffrey? It deals with
a number of the points being raised here.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                     Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:18:07 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:17:39 -0500
Subject: Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Fleming


 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:36:50 -0500
 >UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'The Missing Times'? - Velez

 >Hi Lan,

 >Tsk, tsk, you participate in the UFO UpDates forum but you do
 >not tune in to 'Strange Days... Indeed.' The 'media' side of
 >this e-mail forum is Errol's weekly UFO program, SDI. Just two
 >weeks ago Errol replayed a program (that you can download and
 >listen to at:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

I will try to remedy that oversight ASAP. I got broadband a
couple months ago, and I hope it will make the cyber-listening
experience a little more pleasant than it was with my 56K modem
(which always behaved more like a 16K modem).

Thanks for the reviews of the book, too. The excerpts I read on
the web site seemed well-written and lucid.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:41:18 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:35:07 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 07:54:27 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 13:05:21 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >Your boorishness is a thing of beauty. It's so dependable and
 >exquisite that I have no hesitation in recommending it as a
 >model for would-be boors everywhere.

Dear Dennis,

Your hypocrisy is also things of beauty.

Perhaps Dennis could explain why he earned the nickname "The
Hyena" during his stint as editor of the MUFON Journal. It
wasn't boorish me who hung that title on him. Maybe it had
something to do with his attack-dog, grenade-throwing,
impulsive, petulant, flippant, snide, sarcastic, and insulting
side that he frequently displays here on UpDates, such as this
very post attacking me as a "boor". It is so "dependable and
exquisite", that it practically invites "boorishness" in
response.

 >For a perfect example of same, I hope everyone has gone back
and >read the links you posted, one of which I had posted
earlier. In >case they haven't, here they are again:

 >>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m27-029.shtml
 >>http://www.grassyhill.com/Roswell/Witnesses/CaptKimball.htm

Yes, everybody please read them, so that you can better
understand my so-called "boorish" response to Kimball, which was
really a lengthy, detailed response to Stacy's posting of
Kimball's Web page remarks. I thought I was being critical but
honest in my assessment of Kimball's various statements and
importance as a witness:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m22-003.shtml

 >Read carefully the Q & A exchange between Rudiak and Kimball
 >which I arranged,

First of all, note that Stacy failed to note my original
response to his initial post, which supplies a context in which
all this happened. If you just read Stacy's remark's, it sounds
like my very lengthy, detailed response is riddled with insults
of Kimball, which is entirely untrue. Where Kimball was merely
expressing an opinion, I noted that he was expressing an
opinion. Where Kimball made a valid point based on personal
knowledge, I thought I gave him credit for it. The only time I
was sarcastic was in response to Kimball's own remarks about the
medical staff spending a lot of time off-duty down at the base
recreation sites, that everything seemed normal, therefore
nothing happened.

My true sarcasm in that post was directed at Dennis Stacy,
because he repeatedly accused Roswell authors like Stan Friedman
and Kevin Randle of suppressing Kimball's statements in their
books. It could hardly be censorship, since their awareness of
Kimball didn't even exist until _after_ their books had been
published or were in press. (Stacy _falsely_ accused them of
suppression, but I'm the one who is the boor.)

When Dennis complained about my tone, here is another response I
wrote saying that it was prompted by his previous behavior on
Updates. I agreed to tone down my remarks since he seemed to be
playing it straight for once, but again noted the absurdity of
much of his time-travel-witness-testimony-suppression argument:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m23-009.shtml

Also as Dennis says, he "arranged" the Q & A with Kimball. I
wasn't responding directly to Kimball. I was responding to
Stacy. But Saint Stacy, the innocent one, then did what he
usually loves to do, namely stir the pot. He shot my UpDates
post off to Kimball (whether he sent the whole response with its
complete context or just selected quotes to stir up Kimball I
don't know), which prompted the response from Kimball below.

 >and then tell me who's the Gentleman and who's the Boor here.

Read _all_ the exchanges, then judge for yourself.

 >Kimball was willing to cooperate with Roswell investigators. One
 >would have thought that Rudiak might have been curious and
 >courteous at a minimum. But when Kimball wouldn't say what
 >Rudiak wanted to hear, the latter's instincts to shoot the
 >messenger took over. Notice how easily he slips into his typical
 >snideness. After Rudiak's second or third allusion to swimming
 >pools and golf courses, Kimball has understandably had enough
 >and responds as follows:

Just more bunk from Dennis, who loves beating a dead horse to
death. Dennis is still deliberately leaving out critical
information to properly judge the context of my remarks. Here is
what Kimball originally wrote on his Web-site that prompted my
so-called "snideness:"

(See
http://www.grassyhill.com/Roswell/Witnesses/CaptKimball.htm)

"You would think that with all of the books that have been
written, TV shows fictionalizing the incident, and the coverage
the summer of 1997 in the media (major articles in the New York
Times, cover stories in Time Magazine and Popular Science) that
there must have been a great furor at the Base at that time
(July 1947). To the contrary, life went on as usual. Most of the
medical staff spent their time at the Officer's Club swimming
pool every afternoon after duty hours. The biggest excitement
was the cut-throat hearts game in the BOQ and an intense bingo,
bango bungo golf game at the local nine hole golf course for a
nickel a point!! There was absolutely NO unusual activity on the
Base, no base alerts, no hysteria, no panic in July 1947. Life
went on as usual."

Notice that it was Kimball, not I, who painted this picture of
light-hearted frolicking by medical personnel off-hours. The
purpose of this was his own attempt to discredit the idea that
anything unusual might have happened at the base. To this
imagery I responded to Stacy:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m22-003.shtml

"So because this one person saw no unusual activity at the base
hospital-while he was on duty, or when he was on the golf
course, or down at the base swimming hole or drinking hole, we
are supposed to conclude that nothing at all unusual could have
happened anywhere on the base at all hours of the day and night.
That makes zero sense."

Much further down in the post, in a summary statement I wrote:

"This witness was a junior medical officer at the time with no
general access to all parts of the base, and can only tell us
what he observed from a very limited perspective, much of it
seeming to be the base golf course and swimming pool."

This was sarcastic, to be sure, but it was Kimball himself who
placed himself there when off-duty painting a picture of
complete normalcy at the base. I was again making the obvious
point that Kimball would be unlikely to know what was happening
at one of the base hangars or at the hospital or in the field
when he was off duty and in a completely different location from
where the action would be taking place.

And then further down, I contrasted Kimball's statements that
nothing happened with a base nurse interviewed by OMNI Magazine
in 1995 just before she died. She stated she didn't have any
personal knowledge of a crash or goings-on at the hospital, but
didn't dismiss the possibility like Kimball did:

"However, she felt that a crash and body recovery was plausible,
based on her readings. 'I know that something went on, and I
know it was very hush-hush. And I know I didn't know anything
about it at the time. It was closed up tight as a drum, you
know, by the base officials.' She also said she heard nothing
directly from base personnel, but that was the norm at Roswell.
Everybody kept their mouths shut if they knew anything
sensitive."

"So here's another witness in a comparable position to Kimball
who does not fully agree with his assessment. She had some
awareness of something unusual going on and of it being
suppressed, even if Kimball did not. Maybe she didn't spend as
much time as he did on the golf course and playing cards. And
she certainly didn't share Kimball's opinion that various base
personnel would never engage in a cover-up. If they knew
something important, they would not talk about it."

So that was my third and last mention of Kimball being on the
golf course and playing cards, something I only raised because
Kimball brought it up to begin with to discredit the idea of
something unusual at the base. I never said he spent most of his
time doing these things or was negligent in his duties, though
Kimball apparently took it that way after Dennis chose to
forward these remarks onto him.

I also don't think it out of line to employ a little satire to
point out the absurdity of this witness' line of reasoning: "I
didn't know anything, therefore nothing happened."

If I overdid it, so be it. Those are the only three instances in
which I think I could be remotely be construed as being
sarcastic (or "boorish", to use Dennis' hyperbole) toward Mr.
Kimball's remarks. Read the entirely of that post, and I think
you'll find I give him full credit when he made what I thought
to be a valid point (some extracted examples are also reproduced
below). I also accepted much of what he said at face value,
though I could easily have questioned it.

 >"The primary reason I prepared the web site on Roswell was to
 >provide what I thought was first hand information as to what did
 >NOT take place at the Base Hospital in the summer of 1947. You
 >call me a 'pretty minor character [who] personally knew a very
 >limited amount.' If by this comment you are saying I didn't know
 >what was or was not going [on] in the base hospital you are dead
 >wrong. You have belittled me and demeaned me by your gratuitous
 >remarks about my time at the golf course, swimming pool, and
 >drinking hole. I like to think I performed my duties well and
 >conscientiously - at least well enough to be promoted and given
 >more responsible assignments at higher levels of command and
 >complete over 20 years of active service."

Please note where Kimball called my remarks "gratuitous" about
him spending time down down at the golf course, swimming pool,
and "drinking hole." But it was Kimball who brought the subject
up and made an issue of it. He stated that most of the medical
staff went off duty in the afternoon and spent their time at
these recreation sites. Everything was "usual" at the base.
They played cards, they swam, they played golf. They heard
nothing. There were no alien autopsies.

Here is a portion of a very lengthy e-mail I wrote to Kimball
after Dennis chose to stir things up. This was also posted to
Updates, and is a another detailed and important contextual
reference Dennis chose to leave out:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m28-013.shtml

"I'm sorry if you took it that way. But you also opened your
remarks with all those statements about how nothing unusual was
going on or being said in these various social and recreational
areas, therefore nothing happened. I have to assume that you had
to have been at the golf course, swimming pool, officers club,
etc. when off-duty in order to have formed your impressions. If
not, then why bring it up?"

"Furthermore, unless people at Roswell routinely gossiped about
classified matters in these settings, your comments were hardly
relevant. I don't know -- did they? Maybe over a few drinks at
the Officers Club (what I facetiously referred to as the
"drinking hole")?"

 >Kimball went on to become a Professor of Political Science at
 >the University of Utah. Rudiak, by all appearances and available
 >evidence, went on to become a Professional Boor.

A boorish remark by someone accusing me of being a boor. Like I
said, this is nothing but typical Stacian hypocrisy. Everybody
on the list who reads Dennis' posts knows it. He is one of the
most insulting people here. He loves to get in his licks and
then play the martyred innocent when people respond back.

 >When I recently reintroduced Kimball to this List I described
 >him as the second medical officer in command. I was working from
 >memory. When I went back and reread his testimony I recognized
 >my mistake and immediately corrected myself here.

 >But in Rudiak's world there is no such thing as an innocent
 >mistake, so naturally I was accused to trying to inflate
 >Kimball's credentials.

Kimball was always little more than spear-holder in the opera.
Stacy for the last 3 years has tried to pump him into a major
witness of some kind, which he never was. He was the
third-in-command medical officer by rank, the medical supply
officer. I'm not even sure he was an M.D. This isn't to belittle
Kimball or his work, but to point out he was a pretty minor
character, just like most people at the base. Not only might he
not have a need-to-know when on duty, he may have been off-duty
and somewhere else when all the action allegedly took place at
the base hospital or elsewhere at the base. It was a _big_ base.

 >Kimball's credentials speak for themselves, and I hope everyone
 >will go back and read his original remarks.

Yes, please do, and my complete remarks, and my follow-up
remarks to Kimball and to Stacy.

 >Rudiak would have you believe that they are immaterial,

More serious misrepesentation by Stacy. Read the actual posts,
where I said exactly the opposite.

 >From my original post....

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m22-003.shtml

...here are some excerpts where I comment on some of Kimball's
statements:

Regarding conversations Kimball had with, Jack Comstock, the
chief medical officer in 1995 regarding alien bodies at the base
hospital:

"Despite these obvious caveats, I see no reason at this point to
assume Kimball didn't talk with Comstock, or that he
misrepresented what Comstock told him, or that Comstock knew
anything and was concealing it from Kimball. I take these
statements at face value for the time being. Nothing unusual
happened at the base hospital in July 1947 that either of these
men was aware of."

Elsewhere:

"This is an interesting perspective, but again does not
absolutely rule out that Comstock would simply not talk about it
with Kimball or anyone else, no matter how good friends they may
have been. However, I have no reason to doubt Kimball's opinion
on this at the moment."

Regarding Roswell mortician Glenn Dennis:

"Kimball states he never spoke with Dennis, and I have no reason
to doubt this. But its also conceivable that another non-expert
like Kimball could have posed as the base mortuary officer and
called Dennis for advice."

Note how my remarks here are just full of "boorishness" and lack
of acknowledgement for what Kimball had to say

Here is another example in my e-mail to Kimball:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m28-013.shtml

">I like to think I performed my duties well and
 >conscientiously - at least well enough to be promoted and given more
 >responsible assignments at higher levels of command and complete over 20
 >years of active service."

"I never questioned that. What I questioned was exactly what you
would have known in the position that you occupied. That's why I
referred to you as a junior officer and a minor player at the
base. Absence of gossip down at the officers club or on the golf
course doesn't tell us much. What was relevant was whatever
direct knowledge you may have had or not had. And I believe I
fully acknowledged your statements about the base hospital and
Glenn Dennis as being noteworthy. I also acknowledged your
personal evaluation of Blanchard's character, and noted that it
actually supports the idea that Blanchard would not have acted
on his own in issuing the infamous crashed disk press release,
but would have had it approved from higher up, or may even have
been ordered to put it out."

And in a follow-up response to Stacy:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m23-009.shtml

"In the end what we have is the following:

"1. Kimball wasn't personally aware of anything unusual going on
at the base hospital while he was there, or in other places he
apparently frequented for recreation, like the golf course,
officer's club, swimming pool, etc. (except for the hospital,
these are all irrelevant unless there was loose chatter going on
here, but would there have been?)

"2. The hospital head whom he spoke to in 1995 wasn't aware of
anything unusual (or so he told Kimball). Nor had he spoken of
it before, though he was a good friend (but would he have done
so even if he knew something?)

"3. Blanchard never mentioned anything about it to him though he
knew him well later in his carrer (but why would he?)

"4. Kimball never heard of Glenn Dennis and never spoke to him
for advice on caskets and preservation, even though Kimball
would have acted as the mortuary officer had the occasion
arisen.

"That's about it. Nearly everything else he said was opinion.
Like most witnesses, he's a pretty minor character and
personally knew a very limited amount. It's nonetheless worth
noting. Just another piece to the puzzle."

But according to Stacy, I treated everything Kimball had to say
as "immaterial" and was completely "boorish" towards him.

 >when the
 >exact opposite is true, a concept that continues to sail over
 >his head. Whether one agrees with them or not, they have to be
 >considered and weighed in the context of claims made that the
 >base was in a state of high alert and that alien autopsies were
 >conducted at the base hospital. Kimball simply says that if
 >either or both of these events had happened, he would have been
 >aware of it/them by virtue of his position.

This was all dealt with in the original posts. Stacy continues
to beat a dead horse. There is no reason for Kimball to have
necessarily known about anything, as others besides boorish me
have been pointing out. This is the real concept that continues
to sail over Stacy's head.

 >Take them or leave them, but don't totally ignore them, as
 >Rudiak would have you do. Kimball's remarks are clearly
 >material, as any court-appointed attorney could tell you.

Spoken like a true court-appointed attorney, distorting the
actual record and beating his fist on the table because he has
nothing else to say.

I hope this will be my last post on the matter. Stacy can go
nurse his grudges somewhere else.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                      Re: The Roswell Debate - Fenwick

From: Lawrence Fenwick <lawrencefenwick@interactive.rogers.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:18:45 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:39:14 -0500
Subject: Re:  The Roswell Debate - Fenwick


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:05:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


Hi, Jim,

Thanks for your comment on my opinion about Roswell.

I've been 48 years in research, and have been frustrated and
baffled by most UFO reports, even after investigations of these
reports.

What I said reflects my emotional rather than my rational side.

Of course, we should still probe reports. Maybe one will give us
the proof we need. We probably have a better chance of sucess
than we'd have of the government admitting what it knows.


Larry Fenwick

http://interactive.rogers.com/lawrencefenwick/










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:51:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:41:39 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:09:34 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:40:26 -0600

<snip>

 >I just want Stan to admit same, and, having done so, lighten up
 >on his never ending assertion that of course secrets can be
 >kept, as if the mere presence of rules for secret keeping
 >insured success.

 >If it did, no one from the 509th would ever have admitted to
 >being involved in the recovery of alien bodies. Since they did,
 >it's patently obvious that having a system of
 >compartmentalization, need to know, and/or whatever in place is
 >no guarantee that secrets will remain safe.

 >It's not really that difficult a concept to grasp. I'm sorry if
 >it seems to be giving you trouble.

<snip>

Dennis,

You will to know and your need to know are both commendable and
your pain to save us all from (for?) terminal ignorance an
heroic gesture.

Still, I must mention that, on May 29th 2001, we got this
updated 1998 statement from the CIA:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/press_release/archives/1998/ps071598.html

Where we learn that, in the past 5 years, the CIA has released
over 227,000 pages regarding the JFK assassination. We also
read:

  "Top priority must continue to be given to the review and
  release of information related to the JFK assassination for so
  long as that particular inquiry continues. We must satisfy our
  statutory and moral obligations in this regard."

Thus: not all the documentation has been released on this now 40
year old event but they are still working at it.

Your evident knowledge that secrets cannot be kept has evidently
escaped the poor slobs who still think that things still remain
unknown after 40 years.

Please contact them at:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/contact.htm#web

The CIA needs 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

              UK MoD Established Secret UFO Investigation Group

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:49:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 03:49:04 -0500
Subject: UK MoD Established Secret UFO Investigation Group

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_485819.html?menu=news.latestheadlines

17:14 Wednesday 2nd January 2002


UK MoD Established Secret UFO Investigation Group


Official papers have revealed the Ministry of Defence set up a
secret flying saucer working party in the 1950s.

The papers show the group involved experts from the Directorate
of Scientific Intelligence and the Joint Technical Intelligence
Committee.

It was established in 1951 after a spate of sightings in Sweden
and the US led to a "notable outbreak" of reports in Britain.

However, the scientists gave short shrift to the idea that the
earth was facing an alien invasion from space, dismissing the
claims as "optical illusions and psychological delusions" - or
just plain hoaxes.

"We consider that no progress will be made by attempting further
investigation of unco-ordinated and subjective evidence, and
that positive results could only be obtained by organising
throughout the country, or the world, continuous observation of
the skies by a co-ordinated network of visual observers,
equipped with photographic apparatus, and supplemented by a
network of radar stations and sound locators," they concluded.

"We should regard this, on the evidence so far available, as a
singularly profitless enterprise."

The papers, being made public for the first time, went on: "We
accordingly recommend very strongly that no further
investigation of reported mysterious aerial phenomena be
undertaken, unless and until some material evidence becomes
available."

One of the cases they looked at was RAF Flight Lieutenant
Hubbard who twice claimed to have seen "a flat disc, light pearl
grey in colour, about 50 feet in diameter" flying low over
Farnborough at speeds to 800 to 1,000 mph.

The scientists drily noted: "We find it impossible to believe
that a most unconventional aircraft, of exceptional speed, could
have travelled at no great altitude, in the middle of a fine
summer morning, over a populous and air-minded district like
Farnborough, without attracting the attention of more than one
observer."

Story filed: 17:14 Wednesday 2nd January 2002








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:08:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:08:42 -0500
Subject: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1740000/1740189.stm

Thursday, 3 January, 2002, 10:18 GMT

'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

There have been many sightings in the UK The Ministry of Defence
set up a unit to look at UFO sightings in the 1950s but found no
evidence of aliens, newly-released official documents have
revealed.

The joint group was formed in 1951 after a spate of sightings in
Sweden and the US sparked a "notable outbreak" of reports in the
UK.

But the experts from the Directorate of Scientific Intelligence
and the Joint Technical Intelligence Committee dismissed the
prospect of alien arrivals.

They said sightings were "optical illusions and psychological
delusions" - or just plain hoaxes.

Continuous watch

The group reported: "We consider that no progress will be made
by attempting further investigation of unco-ordinated and
subjective evidence.

"Positive results could only be obtained by organising
throughout the country, or the world, continuous observation of
the skies.

"[We would need] a co-ordinated network of visual observers,
equipped with photographic apparatus, and supplemented by a
network of radar stations and sound locators.

"We should regard this, on the evidence so far available, as a
singularly profitless enterprise.

'Flat disc'

"We accordingly recommend very strongly that no further
investigation of reported mysterious aerial phenomena be
undertaken."

One of the cases they looked at was RAF Flight Lieutenant
Hubbard who twice claimed to have seen "a flat disc, light pearl
grey in colour, about 50ft in diameter" flying low over
Farnborough at speeds to 800 to 1,000mph.

The scientists drily noted: "We find it impossible to believe
that a most unconventional aircraft, of exceptional speed, could
have travelled at no great altitude, in the middle of a fine
summer morning, over a populous and air-minded district like
Farnborough, without attracting the attention of more than one
observer."

But conspiracy theorists sticking to the idea of a transatlantic
cover-up of alien activity are likely to pick up on the fact
some parts of the dossier are still withheld.


WATCH/LISTEN ON THIS STORY

The BBC's Mark Coles
"UFO enthusiasts have
always believed there was a
secret report" -- RealAudio

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1740000/audio/_1740189_ufos8_coles.ram








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:39:35 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:11:07 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Dennis -

 >This is really a very good point and one that I've thought about
 >quite a bit.

Jerry Clark, David Rudiak,

Are you listening? Kevin Randle says I just raised a very good
point.

Film at eleven!

Seriously, Happy New Year All!

More intemperate nonsense - no doubt - to follow.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                     Re: Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:43:50 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:12:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS - Tonnies


 >Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 14:20:18 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Symmetry 0 0 yrtemmyS
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto
 ><ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >Welcome to

 >              2 0  0 2
 >            the year of
 >       symmetry 0 0 yrtemmys

Indeed! Looking forward to 2222!

--Mac









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:58:52 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:14:49 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Gates


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:40:52 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:58:50 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>I must jump in on Kevin's side on this one. Dennis you haven't
 >>done your homework as to how the witnesses were found. I was the
 >>first to talk to many of them. They were not seeking me out. I
 >>was referred to Marcel by a TV station mangager while we were
 >>twiddling our thumbs waiting for a late reporter. He had seen
 >>the newspaper article about Marcel - July 8 PM papers all over -
 >>West of Chicago. When Marcel was in nearby Houma and he began
 >>talking over short wave radio he asked Marcel about it. He was
 >>told nothing. That was in the late 1940s. I was the first to
 >>talk to Haut. I had called the Roswell DR asking for their old
 >>editor - 1978..... Long gone."What do you need? Have an article
 >>here about Walter Haut at the base.... his wife works here!!!."

 >Stan,

<snip>

 >My point, which isn't all that subtle, is this:

 >Time and again you have said that the 509th consisted of
 >hand-picked men who could keep a secret. Compartmentalization,
 >need to know, and all that. Yet when you reach them by
 >telephone, they seem to display little hesitation in being quite
 >talkative about their experiences.

 >So which is it: were they tight-lipped or not? You can't have it
 >both ways.

You can have it both ways. There were some people who were more
then willing to speak, say 40 years later after they saw a news
paper article or whatever, and yet others who apparently still
feel duty bound to not say anything.

Secrets can be kept and Secrets can be leaked.

Back in 1947 I am sure that the principles involved would have
never said anything, nor even within the 509th, a tight knit
group would everybody have had a need-to-know. Only the people
involved would have a need-to-know, and all others no matter how
high ranking, or low ranking wouldn't have the need-to-know.

Captain Kimball's non testimony is just as meaningless as the AF
public affairs officers, from Colonel on down who vehemently
denied the existance of the Stealth fighter from 1980 through
1987 or whenever it was declassified. They weren't telling lies.
They were telling the truth as they knew it. It wasn't until the
program was declassified so to speak (the existance was
declassified but alot of details were still Codeword classifed
for quite awhile after that) and cleared for release to the P/A
office did the people in the PA office "truly 'know."

 >Nor can you claim that they wouldn't have talked among
 >themselves at reunions, only to start singing when you gave them
 >a ring. Why would they share secrets with someone they couldn't
 >have known from Adam, but not with each other? Maybe this makes
 >sense to you and Randle, but it doesn't to me. I'm still waiting
 >to be enlightened.

Knowing military people, some would be more comfortable
discussing subject matter with people outside the military then
inside. Things like that weren't talked about while they were
active duty, and aren't discussed when they are retired or out
of the service.

 >>I located Dubose thru' the West Point Alumni group and called
 >>him. Remember Haut, Marcel, DuBose were all named in the flood
 >>of early articles. I sought the appropriate mortician from an
 >>old Physician; he referred me to one, he referred me to
 >>another, he referred me to Glenn and knew where he was. I got a
 >>phone listing for Bill Brazel a week after his first phone was
 >>installed. There was a great deal of other research... you know
 >>the kind that caused my phone bill to be hundreds of dollars a
 >>month

 >No one's trying to detract from your accomplishments. I'm asking
 >a very simple question: why do you think these people sang to
 >the first researcher that came calling? Figuratively speaking,
 >of course, and civilians excepted.

Does it matter? Why did Ellsburg leak the Pentagon papers? Why
do people inside the CIA leak classified documents to Bill Gertz
for publication in his articles and books? Why do others say
nothing even though the document they are supposedly protecting
has been published?

Some things like current events are leaked immediatly, some
things we will never find out about for 35 or more years, and
only because the principles involved don't feel as duty bound as
they do now.

<snip>


 >I'm tempted to say you don't know how human nature works. You
 >seem to think there's a system that insures security, when
 >nothing could be further from the truth. It's the system and the
 >people in it, which means there are no guarantees because no
 >system can absolutely prohibit Individual behavior.

True enough

Could the secret of a crashed saucer and or bodies at Roswell be
kept for 35 plus years before it leaked? An absolute yes, that
is possible.

Could a highly secretive government group have been studying
crashed saucers and alien bodies and kept it secret for many
years. An absolute yes, that is possible.

Could a highly secretive government group been directing the
TS/Codeword US sat recon program for many years and outside of a
small amout of leaks the program as a whole was kept secret for
36 years? An absolute yes, that in fact happened, and we know
this from highly classified Code Word documents that were
declassified by an Executive Order.

Again Secrets can be kept and Secrets can be leaked.

 >Exhibit A: 'When Betrayal and Paranoia Are Part of the Job' in
 >today's NY Times editorial page, about Robert Hanssen's selling
 >of FBI secrets. According to the author, Tom Mangold, Hanssen
 >sold his country out not for crass cash, but for "peer
 >approval".

As I recall it came out recently that Hanssen sold out for a bundle
of cold hard cash, amongst other things.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 22:29:32 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:20:32 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:40:26 -0600

"But Dennis's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say,
less than profound reflection."

-- Jerry Clark


"This is really a very good point and one that I've thought
about quite a bit."

-- Kevin Randle

Gee, who would've thought they were talking about the same
thing?

By the way, "profound reflection" is a copyright of Jerry Clark.
As is the word "reeks."

Otherwise, I might be tempted to employ both in a sentence of my
own making. If I were to do so, it might go something like this:

"But Clark's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say,
less than profound reflection."

At least I haven't been shown any convincing evidence to the
contrary.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

               Cydonian Imperative: - 01-03-02 'Crowned Face'

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:23:41 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:08:59 -0500
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: - 01-03-02 'Crowned Face'


The Cydonian Imperative
1-3-02

Analysis Suggests Natural Origin for "Crowned Face"
by Mac Tonnies

http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html

[image]

New SFS renderings cast doubt on an artificial interpretation of
the 'Crowned Face'.

New shape-from-shading images by Greg Orme show the so-called
'Crowned Face' under a variety of lighting conditions, revealing
it to be a natural-looking feature. The following quote is from
Page 18 of The Cydonian Imperative, which contains additional
commentary on this controversial feature:


"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."


-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly

From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:49:42 +1100
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:27:01 -0500
Subject: Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly


Greetings one and all I trust everyone had a safe and happy
Christmas/New Year,

I thought I would start off this new solar orbit with a
bombshell - or is that a wake up call?

Back in 1999 at a web site called The ScifiVine, I wrote about
how we were thought of by other races in the Galaxy as being
nothing more than a race of murderous barbarians and that we
would never be allowed off this planet unless we changed our
ways and some beliefs.

This line of thinking is now nothing new. What I didn't include
back in those early days of my struggle to write about such
things was the fact that we humans had walked down this path of
technology before and had gotten to the point of being able to
venture out into space. Though, then like now, we were too
bloodthirsty and any race we might come into contact with would
clearly be in danger. So we were stopped from getting to the
point of being able to leave this planet and travel to other
solar systems. If I'm right we have been stopped more than once
before, it could be as many as three times, maybe even more.

At the time of my learning about much of this, I made a mistake
and it was thought by those telling about such things that I
wasn't yet ready. I guess they were right as I didn't know how
one would go about changing the ways of humans.

Money, guns, war, it is all humans seem to think about, besides
sex. Most humans still cannot get their head around the fact we
are not the only creatures alive in this universe, or even how
important all other life is on this planet is. Human kind seems
to think it is the be all and end all of existence and nothing
else much matters. So how would one, even many, turn this kind
of thinking around? I'm starting to think it would be a waste of
time even trying. It would take decades to achieve and I don't
think we have that kind of time any more.

This leads me to the coming prophecies and one that stands out
is about the end of Human Kind. If one reads or interprets the
prophecies correctly, it does only say that Human Kind comes to
an end as we know it now, and not all life on this planet- which
is consistent with what has happened in the past.

So is this coming doom nothing more than a big slap on the wrist
of us getting it wrong yet again? Can we ever get it right? It
is really sad when you think about it. We could be interacting
with other races, visiting other planets, learning about our
real past, (even though it might not be as grand as we would
hope for) doing things we only thought we could dream about. Yet
for a few selfish greedy mindless so and so's, none of this will
happen for us, it will only ever be a dream.

I get depressed by all of this sometimes and wonder why I should
be stuck on this planet of losers? Knowing too much is sometimes
a curse and not a blessing. Being blissfully ignorant of such
things has its advantages. But I am human and one with all
others on this planet - part of the original sin. This original
sin... is it that many years ago we ventured to other planets
only to kill, plunder and return home with the spoils? It
wouldn't surprise me if this were the case.

Still, for some reason I hold a small glimmer of hope that one
day we might raise above our evil ways, lay down our fears, put
our faith in that which created us and not in weapons or money
and join the rest of the Universe.

I did, however, argue a point with those that told me about such
things as we did sort of go from horse and buggy to space travel
in one hell of a short period. My argument was that perhaps we
had been interfered with, lead down the path of destruction
through no choice of our own. They thought about this, but then
pointed out that we do know the difference between right and
wrong and we are the ones that make these decisions. If we truly
did think that the only way to solve a problem was to pull out a
weapon and use it, then we are truly a race not fit to leave
this planet, but we all know this isn't the right way to solve a
problem or differences we may have with each other. Its just the
easy way, or should I say, the best way to ensure the problem is
solved in favour of the one with the most weapons? Which is to
say, right or wrong doesn't matter, what matters is those that
are right have the most fire power.

I guess there is nothing more to say, but goodbye 21st century,
hello Armageddon. Those that know about this have themselves a
space ark or is that International Space Station? Not that I
think it will do them much good, since by the time the dust
settles they will have spent so long in space there will be no
returning to the surface anyway. Though I wish them good luck.

So as Bender would say "Bring it on Baby!"










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                   Nick Pope's Weird World - Dec/Jan 01/02

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 12:09:46 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:38:49 -0500
Subject: Nick Pope's Weird World - Dec/Jan 01/02


NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD

Announcement: Nick Pope will be talking about the Flying Saucer
Working Party on the James Whale Show, TalkSport Radio, tonight,
between 11pm and 1am.

NICK POPE'S WEIRD WORLD

Here's my joint December/January column. May your dreams come
true in 2002.

The Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters

In last month's column I said that I'd received a copy of The
Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters, edited by Ronald
Story. This is a follow up work to The Encyclopedia of UFOs,
which Story edited in 1980, and I've now had a chance to dip
into a fair bit of this new book.

The bottom line is that this is a classic title which combines
breadth with depth and is recommended for anyone with an
interest in ufology, irrespective of whether they are new to the
subject or already knowledgeable. The book covers a lot of
ground, combining position statements from prominent ufologists
with more in-depth essays, some old and some new.

Some highlights include Eddie Bullard's balanced commentary on
abductions, Alvin Lawson's Imaginary Abductee Study essay and
Richard Haines' piece on shapes of UFOs.

The only downside to this book concerns balance. Story wrote to
various ufologists asking for their help in compiling this book,
both by providing biographical details and position statements,
and by writing on various topics. But I suspect some politics in
the choice of who gets to write about what, so the book may be a
little confusing for some.

Roger Leir writes about implants, so we get a pro ETH essay.
Bruce Maccabee covers the McMinnville photographs, whose
authenticity he supports. Conversely, we get exclusively
sceptical takes on the MJ12 documents, the alien autopsy film
and crop circles.

Hypnosis is well covered with both a 'pro' and an 'anti' essay,
but while this would be a fairer way of covering all the
subjects, it would be impractical.

On occasion I detect a slight sceptical bias, but then this is
Story's project so perhaps that's his prerogative. But it does
look a little churlish when sceptical commentaries are sometimes
inserted after key pro ETH essays, in an apparent eagerness to
have the last word.

So Bruce Maccabee's essay on Gulf Breeze is followed by a
sceptical postscript from Randall Fitzgerald, while the brief
entry concerning John Mack is followed by a lengthy piece from
Joe Nickell suggesting that Mack's abductees are fantasy prone
personalities.

But no UFO book is ever going to achieve true balance, and
despite some reservations over a bias towards the psychosocial
approach (Robert Baker and Martin Kottmeyer loom large in this
book) I have no hesitation in saying that this is one of the
most important new UFO books of recent years, and is highly
recommended.

Go to www.ufoencyclopediaproject.com for further details.


New Rendlesham Witnesses

The bumper November/December edition of UFO Magazine contains a
feature on a new witness to the Rendlesham Forest incident. This
witness was based at RAF Neatishead and challenges the official
line that nothing was tracked on radar.

He also alleges that radar tapes were removed shortly after the
incident. On this latter point I would urge caution.

Although such actions arouse the suspicion of conspiracy
theorists, they are actually routine in the aftermath of a
potentially significant UFO case.

While working in Sec(AS) I frequently requested that radar tapes
be impounded and sent to me, so that I could check to see
whether a visual UFO sighting was correlated by radar evidence.
So the removal of radar tapes from RAF Neatishead may simply
show that DS8, which was the predecessor of Sec(AS), was
carrying out a standard investigation.

The MOD documents recently released to Lord Hill-Norton and
Georgina Bruni tend to support this, and show that at DS8's
request, MOD radar specialists had tasked RAF Watton and RAF
Neatishead with examining their radar tapes. Coincidentally,
I've been interviewing a new witness who was based at RAF
Bentwaters at the time of the incident and has a fascinating
story to tell.

On current plans, an article based on these interviews will
appear in a future edition of UFO Magazine.


Eye Spy Magazine

Long before the terrible events of 11 September, the new British
magazine Eye Spy was running in-depth features on Usama Bin
Laden and his murderous Al Qaida terrorist organisation. It was
not surprising, therefore, that in the aftermath of the
terrorist atrocities various international distributors wanted
to sell the magazine overseas and print vast numbers of the back
issues. This had to be handled carefully, lest it looked like an
attempt to cash in on the outrages, but the fact of the matter
is that Eye Spy put Bin Laden on its front cover well before the
recent terrorist outrages.

Recent issues of the magazine dealt sensitively and
intelligently with the aftermath of 11 September. Their website:

www.eyespymag.com

is constantly updated with information on various intelligence
and security stories, and is worth checking out. They have
already run several world exclusives and have more in the
pipeline.


Alien Abductions and Rhesus Negative Blood

Irrespective of individual blood groups A, B, AB or O, the
plasma membranes of most people's red blood cells carry the
series of antigens that categorise them as Rhesus Positive.
Those without this factor are categorised as Rhesus Negative and
I've recently had discussions with other leading abduction
researchers concerning the question of whether there might be a
higher proportion of Rhesus Negative people among abductees than
in the population as a whole. The Rhesus Negative issue has
cropped up a few times with abductees I've been working with and
is something that is worthy of further study.


The Real X-Files

Hard on the heels of Georgina Bruni's scoop concerning the
release of MOD documents on the Rendlesham Forest incident, two
enterprising members of the public have stumbled upon 'DSI/JTIC
Report No. 7'. This is the 'full Intelligence study' referred to
in the Air Ministry's response to Winston Churchill's 28 July
1952 memo in which he asked 'What does all this stuff about
flying saucers amount to? What can it mean? What is the truth?
Let me have a report at your convenience'.

Although interesting from a historical point of view, this
rather quaint little piece of history reveals more about Cold
War paranoia than it does about UFOs.

Set up in October 1950 and reporting in June 1951, the study
drew heavily on USAF work done during Projects Sign and Grudge
(forerunners of Project Blue Book).

Report No. 7 was sceptical about the UFO phenomenon and
recommended no further action. Yet a few years later this
recommendation was overturned and the UK did set up a project to
research and investigate UFOs.

Unlike the Americans, the British didn't do this work under a
discrete project name. Instead, the work was done within various
secretariat divisions, which over the years have had decidedly
unglamorous names such as S6, SHF(Air), S4(Air), DS8, Sec(AS)
and now DAS.

I worked in Sec(AS) from 1991 to 1994 and wrote about my
official research and investigation into UFOs and other strange
phenomena in Open Skies, Closed Minds. In this book I give an
insight into the history, policy and politics of the Air
Ministry and the Ministry of Defence's involvement with the UFO
phenomenon, as well as lifting the lid on some of the amazing
cases that came our way over the years.


Nick Pope


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 3 Jan 2002 05:23:19 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:42:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:07:30 -0600

 >>Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:07:15 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>Here is the story. Oberg has talked to her about it, but Oberg
 >>dares not speak lest he cast Marcia Smith adrift in a leaky life
 >>boat.

 >That's your story, and I'm satisfied that on those features
 >which I'm personally acquainted with, you're just making it up
 >as you go along, and I see no present value to trying to
 >influence anybody willing to believe your version, so as I said,
 >you have the floor.

 >It may be that people decline to cooperate with you because the
 >trait of making up things and attributing them to others - which
 >you have just done in this specific instance - may occur in
 >other cases too.

Once again you could have simply said you are afraid to talk.
Oberg short on words? Silence in this particular case is indeed
golden.

As for Ms. Smith we have another plan.


Grant

Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 08:58:48 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:56:10 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:39:35 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Dennis -

 >>This is really a very good point and one that I've thought about
 >>quite a bit.

 >Jerry Clark, David Rudiak,

 >Are you listening? Kevin Randle says I just raised a very good
 >point.

I'll read Dr. Randle's post again, but it seemed to me that that
was merely an opening phrase beginning the well reasoned and
detailed dismemberment of your shot from the hip, shallowly
conjectured, and suspiciously disruptive cynicism.

 >Film at eleven!

And I'd watch it... but for the Marlin Perkins 'Mutual of Omaha'
re-runs on a competing channel, besides, your lot always has an
open mike on the world stage, and one or the other of you can
always be accessed to predictably produce the presumptuously
pompous party line.

 >Seriously, Happy New Year All!

I'm sure we're all hoping for the best... but the celebration is
likely just another iteration of a tired paradigm as
manipulating as an airy admonition to pray, reflexively spend
seasonal money, or hit the social re-set button preparatory to
making the mistakes of the previous year in the subsequent
year... That sounds cynical, and it is, but it's the mirror
image of _your_ brand...

 >More intemperate nonsense - no doubt - to follow.

...only if _you_ post again, sir. <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 09:08:30 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:58:01 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 22:29:32 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:40:26 -0600

 >"But Dennis's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say,
 >less than profound reflection."

 >-- Jerry Clark

 >"This is really a very good point and one that I've thought
 >about quite a bit."

 >-- Kevin Randle

 >Gee, who would've thought they were talking about the same
 >thing?

 >By the way, "profound reflection" is a copyright of Jerry Clark.
 >As is the word "reeks."

 >Otherwise, I might be tempted to employ both in a sentence of my
 >own making. If I were to do so, it might go something like this:

 >"But Clark's particular objection to it reeks of, shall we say,
 >less than profound reflection."

 >At least I haven't been shown any convincing evidence to the
 >contrary.

With all respect sir... you are seeming _oblivious_ regarding
evidence to the contrary. Your reflections _are_ less than
profound, and that reeks _suspiciously_, given your obvious
intelligence, literary talent, and years of experience.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 12:51:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 23:47:26 -0500
Subject: Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Ledger


 >Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:08:42 -0500
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

 >Source: BBC News

 >http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1740000/1740189.stm

 >Thursday, 3 January, 2002, 10:18 GMT

 >'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

 >There have been many sightings in the UK The Ministry of Defence
 >set up a unit to look at UFO sightings in the 1950s but found no
 >evidence of aliens, newly-released official documents have
 >revealed.

 >The joint group was formed in 1951 after a spate of sightings in
 >Sweden and the US sparked a "notable outbreak" of reports in the
 >UK.

 >But the experts from the Directorate of Scientific Intelligence
 >and the Joint Technical Intelligence Committee dismissed the
 >prospect of alien arrivals.

 >They said sightings were "optical illusions and psychological
 >delusions" - or just plain hoaxes.

 >Continuous watch

 >The group reported: "We consider that no progress will be made
 >by attempting further investigation of unco-ordinated and
 >subjective evidence.

 >"Positive results could only be obtained by organising
 >throughout the country, or the world, continuous observation of
 >the skies.

 >"[We would need] a co-ordinated network of visual observers,
 >equipped with photographic apparatus, and supplemented by a
 >network of radar stations and sound locators.

 >"We should regard this, on the evidence so far available, as a
 >singularly profitless enterprise.

 >'Flat disc'

 >"We accordingly recommend very strongly that no further
 >investigation of reported mysterious aerial phenomena be
 >undertaken."

 >One of the cases they looked at was RAF Flight Lieutenant
 >Hubbard who twice claimed to have seen "a flat disc, light pearl
 >grey in colour, about 50ft in diameter" flying low over
 >Farnborough at speeds to 800 to 1,000mph.

 >The scientists drily noted: "We find it impossible to believe
 >that a most unconventional aircraft, of exceptional speed, could
 >have travelled at no great altitude, in the middle of a fine
 >summer morning, over a populous and air-minded district like
 >Farnborough, without attracting the attention of more than one
 >observer."

 >But conspiracy theorists sticking to the idea of a transatlantic
 >cover-up of alien activity are likely to pick up on the fact
 >some parts of the dossier are still withheld.


The BBC of course would think nothing odd about parts of a
dossier being withheld - unless of course it had to do with
their annual budget being cut and the reasons for same
were withheld. And they are babes in the woods to be sure if
they don't think that people and governments conspire.

Notice how that word gets tossed about these days - one of those
politically incorrect words. I see it bandied about even in our
provincial legislature, particularly whenever a cabinet minister
doesn't want to answer a question. "That honourable member sees
conspiracies everywhere, Mr. Speaker."

Note though that the BBC did pick up on the fact that parts of
the dossier were withheld. Why wouldn't they ask why?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                     NIDS: Report On Montana Mutilation

From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 14:49:18 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 23:56:55 -0500
Subject: NIDS: Report On Montana Mutilation


Enclosed is a summary of an investigation we conducted on a
reported animal mutilation in Montana in June 2001. Some of your
readers may be interested in the contents of the full report
(approx 50 pages) that has just been published on the What's New
section of the NIDS web site:

http://www,nidsci.org


Sincerely,

Colm Kelleher
NIDS

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/



Investigation of a Report of Animal Mutilation
in Dupuyer, Montana on 6/27/2001

National Institute For Discovery Science
=A9January 2002

Abstract

NIDS received a call from local law enforcement regarding a
six-year old Red Angus cow found dead at 8:00-9:00 AM on 6/27/01
near Dupuyer, Montana. According to the rancher, the animal had
last been seen alive on 6/25/01. The animal was lying on its
right side. The left eye and eyelid were missing, the hide from
the left jaw was missing and parts of the tongue were gone. The
vagina and rectum were also missing. A thorough examination of
the area by law enforcement failed to reveal any tracks,
markings or signs of struggle from the animal. When the hide
under the left jaw was cut away, investigators noticed a
greenish-colored tissue mass just under the jaw. The green color
markedly contrasted with the pink color of the surrounding
tissue. Because of the ambient temperature and humidity in the
area and to prevent further decomposition, the head of the
animal was severed and immediately frozen. After the head was
thoroughly frozen in Montana, it was then rapidly shipped to
NIDS in Las Vegas, Nevada, where it was immediately stored at
-85=BAC to prevent further decomposition.

NIDS then consulted with a forensic expert, who arranged to fly
to Las Vegas to conduct a thorough sampling of the head. An
analysis of the eyes and jaw showed no blood in the tissue,
indicating that the heart had stopped beating upon removal of
the tissues. If the animal was mutilated, the mutilation
occurred after death. In addition to the gross pathology,
samples of eye fluid from the animal's right eye and tissue from
the neck area were collected. A comprehensive set of organic
extraction procedures followed by Infrared spectrometry and gas
chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) analysis were conducted
to determine the molecular components in the eye fluid and
tissues. Preliminary chemical analysis was also conducted on
maggot mass from the animal.

A second animal was obtained from a slaughterhouse and left to
decompose for four days as a sham or control animal. Tissue and
eye fluid from the control animal was subjected to identical
extraction and analytical procedures.

A compound called oxindole was found in both tissue and eye
fluid from the mutilated animal but not in the control animal,
suggesting oxindole was not a decomposition product. The
clinical and pharmacological properties of oxindole have been
examined primarily in Europe (Mannaioni et al.(1998) British J.
Pharmac. 125, 1751-1760). However, prior to these more recent
studies, it has been well established that systemic
administration of oxindole to rats, dogs or humans has been
shown to cause profound sedation, decrease in blood pressure,
decrease in muscular tone and loss of consciousness (Orcutt et
al. (1964) Arch. Int. Pharmacodynam. 152, 121-131). Our failure
to find oxindole in the control animal leads us to the working
hypothesis that oxindole may have been used to sedate the animal
prior to its death and mutilation. Similar analyses of different
mutilated animals in the future will either substantiate or
negate this working hypothesis. For example, the pharmacokinetic
data on administration of oxindole to large animals is scanty as
are the data on the extent of rumen-saliva recycling of
tryptophan metabolites. A second hypothesis is that a traumatic
event triggered the swift accumulation of oxindole in the
tissues of the mutilated animal but not in the control animal.
These subjects are currently under study.

Since the summer of 2001, NIDS has received over eight reports
of animal mutilations from Montana, the majority of which were
too old to seriously investigate. Nevertheless, this number of
reports in a few months constitutes by far the largest report
frequency received in the history of NIDS investigations of the
animal mutilation phenomenon. Therefore, the present case should
be seen not as an isolated incident, but in the context of a
wave of mutilation reports in 2001 from Montana. It should also
be noted that during the period 1974-1977, the Great Falls area
of Montana was the locus of one of the most intense and
sustained waves of reported animal mutilations in recorded
history. For more details on this historical animal mutilation
wave see the NIDS report at
http://www.nidsci.org/articles/pdf/wolverton_report.pdf.

Finally, NIDS is gratified by the increasing spirit of
cooperation and collegiality between our organization and
ranchers, law enforcement officials and veterinarians. We
believe that the successful investigation of animal mutilations
is utterly dependent upon close cooperation between NIDS and
three separate groups:  (a) ranchers who are willing to make
timely reports to NIDS  (702-798-1700) or to local law
enforcement, (b) open-minded veterinarians who are willing to
conduct timely necropsies on mutilated animals, and (c)
hard-working law enforcement officials who serve as both
investigators and liaisons between NIDS and the ranchers
themselves. We emphasize that NIDS absorbs 100% of the costs of
these investigations. Secondly, because of the controversial
nature of the animal mutilation phenomenon, NIDS does NOT
publicize the names of ranchers, law enforcement officials or
veterinarians who work with us.

The full 50 page (approx) report with photographs, tables,
figures and raw data can be found in the What's New section of
the NIDS web site http://www.nidsci.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 3

                    Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:24:24 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 23:59:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Rimmer


 >From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Repeating Past Mistakes
 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:49:42 +1100

 >Back in 1999 at a web site called The ScifiVine, I wrote about
 >how we were thought of by other races in the Galaxy as being
 >nothing more than a race of murderous barbarians and that we
 >would never be allowed off this planet unless we changed our
 >ways and some beliefs.

I wonder if any other races in this or other galaxies hate
themselves as much as so many human beings seem to?

 >Money, guns, war, it is all humans seem to think about, besides
 >sex.

So that pretty much finishes off art, literature, music,
philosophy, scientific enquiry, philanthropy, medicine and the
simple fact that most humans do seem to be able to rub along
quite happily without killing each other - despite all we have
witnessed lately.

 >This leads me to the coming prophecies and one that stands out
 >is about the end of Human Kind. If one reads or interprets the
 >prophecies correctly, it does only say that Human Kind comes to
 >an end as we know it now, and not all life on this planet- which
 >is consistent with what has happened in the past.

And there are a lot of people - like Mr Kelly - who seem to be
hardly able to conceal their glee at the thought! (BTW, what is
a "coming rophecy"? Is it a prophecy that hasn't been prophecied
yet? Even smarter than a regular prophecy!)

 >So is this coming doom nothing more than a big slap on the wrist
 >of us getting it wrong yet again? Can we ever get it right? It
 >is really sad when you think about it. We could be interacting
 >with other races, visiting other planets, learning about our
 >real past, (even though it might not be as grand as we would
 >hope for) doing things we only thought we could dream about. Yet
 >for a few selfish greedy mindless so and so's, none of this will
 >happen for us, it will only ever be a dream.

Just so long as we don't get to interact to much with that
enlightened race which seems to be so keen on abducting us and
doing some rather unpleasant things to are innards.

 >I get depressed by all of this sometimes and wonder why I should
 >be stuck on this planet of losers? Knowing too much is sometimes
 >a curse and not a blessing. Being blissfully ignorant of such
 >things has its advantages. But I am human and one with all
 >others on this planet - part of the original sin. This original
 >sin... is it that many years ago we ventured to other planets
 >only to kill, plunder and return home with the spoils? It
 >wouldn't surprise me if this were the case.

And I get depressed by people who, like Mr Kelly, live at a time
when the world is more peaceful - yes! - and prosperous for the
greatest number of people at any time in its history. Yes there
is a lot of misery happening around the world, but we're not
going to even begin to tackle it if we just sit around waiting
for some saviours from space to turn up and "interact" with us.

 >Still, for some reason I hold a small glimmer of hope that one
 >day we might raise above our evil ways, lay down our fears, put
 >our faith in that which created us and not in weapons or money
 >and join the rest of the Universe.

How about rising above our alleged evil ways through our own
efforts and letting the rest of the Universe just get on with
it's own affairs?

 >I did, however, argue a point with those that told me about such
 >things as we did sort of go from horse and buggy to space travel
 >in one hell of a short period. My argument was that perhaps we
 >had been interfered with, lead down the path of destruction
 >through no choice of our own.

Maybe we are actually quite a clever species. I know this is a
difficult concept for some people to grasp. Curiously, the
people who have this attitude tend to be the people who like in
the most peaceful and prosperous parts of this planet. Maybe
they're not busy enough trying to improve their own lives by
their own efforts, like people in less fortunate areas, that
they have time to sit around and write stuff like this.

 >I guess there is nothing more to say, but goodbye 21st century,
 >hello Armageddon. Those that know about this have themselves a
 >space ark or is that International Space Station? Not that I
 >think it will do them much good, since by the time the dust
 >settles they will have spent so long in space there will be no
 >returning to the surface anyway. Though I wish them good luck.

 >So as Bender would say "Bring it on Baby!"

As Rimmer would say, "Pur-leez!"

--
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                    Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:21:14 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:00:25 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Rimmer


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:54:47 EST
 >Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Personally I can reasonably doubt. Just because you get a grant
 >does not mean you automatically have access to any and all
 >information in the hands of the people giving the grant. Even
 >without the information a person getting a grant could do an
 >indepth job.

 >Wasn't Stan Friedman given a grant by the FUND for research into
 >the MJ-12 documents? If so was he given full and complete access
 >to every particle of information and or videos in the hands of
 >the fund as part of his research?

If not why not? Why would anyone say, I want to pay you to
research documents about X, Y or Z - but not the one's I've got.

Sounds pretty stupid to me, whether it's Friedman or Pflock who
has been put in that position.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 16:50:29 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:03:01 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:51:05 -0500

<snip>

 >Your evident knowledge that secrets cannot be kept has evidently
 >escaped the poor slobs who still think that things still remain
 >unknown after 40 years.

 >Please contact them at:

 >http://www.cia.gov/cia/contact.htm#web

 >The CIA needs you.

Serge,

I thought you knew that I already worked for the CIA.

Oops, guess the secret is out now!


Dennis









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:07:26 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:40:46 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 16:37:20 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >>[Kimball] My response: I am at a loss to understand how you can
 >>state that I had no clearance to the flight line or hangars. The
 >>fact is, I had a Top Secret clearance and was very often on the
 >>flight line and in many of the hangars for a variety of reasons,
 >>including participation in training programs, familiarization
 >>programs, and taking actual flights in different aircraft,
 >>including training missions. Also, staff meetings were held by
 >>Major Comstock for the express purposes of sharing information
 >>about what was going on not only at the hospital but on the base
 >>in general and to discuss any unusual problems. I did not
 >>perform my duties, and there were many, in a vacuum.

 >Dennis, List, all -

 >Let me make a few observations here. First, a top secret
 >clearance does not mean automatic clearance to see all top
 >secret material. There is such a thing as need to know which
 >disqualifies many who hold top secret clearances from getting
i>nto material that they have no need to know .

My favorite story about 'need to know' goes like this. I heard
this on TV/radio _many_ years ago so I may have some details
wrong, but here goes.

In the early 80's under Reagan, Bill Casey was DCI (Director of
Central Intelligence). His 2nd in command was one Robert "
Bobby" Gates. You will recall all the Iran/Contra nasty stuff
that was going on in those days (supporting a revolution in
Nicaragua in spite of Congressional direction to NOT fund any
such thing, as I recall).

Anyway, Casey died. In the latter half of the '80's Bobby was up
in front of Congress to be approved as DCI. Nasty congressman
were throwing the Iran Contra affair at Gates, claiming that he
was involved and hence had no moral authority to be DCI---- of
something like that. Gates was denying involvement, saying he
knew nothing of the particular affair that some Congressmen were
trying to pin around his neck. The Congressmen couldn't believe
that Gates was innocent... after all he was #2 at the agency.
_Surely_he_would_have_known_everything_about_IRAN_CONTRA_! (It's
only _logical_ you know!) (Can't you just see some Congressman
pounding hius shoe on the desk as he emphasizes this point?) Now
we come to the reason for this story:

An old curmudgeon of the CIA, a guy who went back into the 50's
as I recall (but I don't recall his name... although I would
recognize it, It think), was called to testify to Congress on
behalf of Gates. Mr. Curmudgeon testified as follows based on
what Casey had told him in the early 80's (paraphrase):

"It is true that Gates knew nothing of it. Casey told me 'I
don't tell Gates everything."

End Of Story









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:09:41 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Maccabee


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 14:14:48 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >When you boil it down, the Roswell story, as most of us know it,
 >that has come from military sources, was put together through
 >multiple interviews with the men involved and their family
 >members. Many of those military members were reluctant to talk,
 >told a little bit about their involvement, but might have held
 >back quite a bit more. I think here that these men just didn't
 >want to lie to us and they didn't want to violate their oaths,
 >and said the bare minimum they could. Most of us are basically
 >honest and when confronted with a situation in which a
 >bald-faced lie would extract us, try to weasel our way out of
 >it. We try not to lie without revealing that which we know.
 >Yeah, I can think of many examples in which people looked us
 >right in the eye and lied their asses off. But, I think for the
 >majority, it just wasn't quite that simple.

 >Cavitt, for example, lied his ass off. Even after he had talked
 >to Colonel Weaver and they concocted that ridiculous interview
 >in which Cavitt said he had picked up the balloon with Marcel
 >(after telling me that he had never been involved in the
 >recovery of a balloon), told me, after I described what both
 >Rickett and Marcel said about him, "Well, that sounds like me,
 >but I wasn't there." Looked me right in the eye and told me a
 >lie that he had to know would be exposed as a lie in a few
 >months (or maybe he didn't think the Air Force would publish the
 >transcript of the interview).

Cavitt lied during the Weaver interview. He said he had not met
the rancher, Brazel. Yet, he admitted to going to the "crash
site" with Marcel. But Marcel didn't know where the crash site
was... only Brazel knew. Brazel led Marcel and Cavitt to the
site. This only makes me wonder how stupid the cover up guys
think we are! See http://brumac.8k.com/Roswell/CavittEmptor.html
for an analysis of Cavitt's testimony. Cavitt Emptor!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                   Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:11:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Maccabee


 >From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Repeating Past Mistakes
 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:49:42 +1100

 >Greetings one and all I trust everyone had a safe and happy
 >Christmas/New Year,

 >I thought I would start off this new solar orbit with a
 >bombshell - or is that a wake up call?

<snip>

 >This leads me to the coming prophecies and one that stands out
 >is about the end of Human Kind. If one reads or interprets the
 >prophecies correctly, it does only say that Human Kind comes to
 >an end as we know it now, and not all life on this planet- which
 >is consistent with what has happened in the past.


 >I guess there is nothing more to say, but goodbye 21st century,
 >hello Armageddon.

Pleasant thought! Guess I'll start packing right now. (I expect
to be one of the 144,000.)










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:13:20 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1 - Maccabee


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:01:34 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 1


 >Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

Nice to have Joe back on line!









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 17:30:06 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 00:14:43 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:41:18 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Dear Dennis,

 >Your hypocrisy is also things of beauty.

 >Perhaps Dennis could explain why he earned the nickname "The
 >Hyena" during his stint as editor of the MUFON Journal. It
 >wasn't boorish me who hung that title on him. Maybe it had
 >something to do with his attack-dog, grenade-throwing,
 >impulsive, petulant, flippant, snide, sarcastic, and insulting
 >side that he frequently displays here on UpDates, such as this
 >very post attacking me as a "boor". It is so "dependable and
 >exquisite", that it practically invites "boorishness" in
 >response.

David,

"The Hyena" soubriquet is news to me, but I learn something new
every day. Are you sure you didn't come up with it? Why not?

<snip>

 >Also as Dennis says, he "arranged" the Q & A with Kimball. I
 >wasn't responding directly to Kimball. I was responding to
 >Stacy. But Saint Stacy, the innocent one, then did what he
 >usually loves to do, namely stir the pot. He shot my UpDates
 >post off to Kimball (whether he sent the whole response with its
 >complete context or just selected quotes to stir up Kimball I
 >don't know), which prompted the response from Kimball below.

Of course I forwarded him your whole post. Why would I take the
time to edit it?

<snip>

 >Here is a portion of a very lengthy e-mail I wrote to Kimball
 >after Dennis chose to stir things up.

I didn't choose to stir things up. As memory serves, I posted a
link to Kimball's web site. When you responded, I passed your
comments along to Kimball for his response, which I then posted.

I'm glad you corresponded with him later. It goes w/o saying that
if it was an e-mail from you it was very lengthy. Any chance of
posting his response here, or did you not get one?

 >I hope this will be my last post on the matter. Stacy can go
 >nurse his grudges somewhere else.

But, David, there is nowhere else where I can nurse my grudges.
I thought you knew that.


Dennis "The Hyena" Stacy
"Are those spots or stripes?"









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 19:04:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:35:21 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:41:18 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 07:54:27 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 13:05:21 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Your boorishness is a thing of beauty. It's so dependable and
 >>exquisite that I have no hesitation in recommending it as a
 >>model for would-be boors everywhere.

 >Dear Dennis,

 >Your hypocrisy is also things of beauty.

 >Perhaps Dennis could explain why he earned the nickname "The
 >Hyena" during his stint as editor of the MUFON Journal. It
 >wasn't boorish me who hung that title on him. Maybe it had
 >something to do with his attack-dog, grenade-throwing,
 >impulsive, petulant, flippant, snide, sarcastic, and insulting
 >side that he frequently displays here on UpDates, such as this
 >very post attacking me as a "boor". It is so "dependable and
 >exquisite", that it practically invites "boorishness" in
 >response.

Dear David,

A couple of last thoughts.

When The Hyena quit as editor of the MUFON Journal (a stint that
lasted 12 years) our circulation was somewhere in the
neighborhood of 4800, having reached a high of 5200 or so. I'm
not sure where its circulation is now, but the last time I
looked it was barely above 3000 and still dropping.

I don't claim credit for its rise, nor do I suggest that my
absence is in anyway responsible for its precipitous membership
decline. All sorts of factors are no doubt involved, beginning
with the rise of the Internet and the proliferation of UFO
sites.

The point is, when I was editor, I tried to put out the best
issue I could - month after month. And I think this goes to why
you and I don't "hit it off", so to speak, as if this List
needed another monumental understatement.

Yes, I've accused you of snideness, boorishness, and so on, and
you've more than energetically and promptly returned the favor.
I have no problem with that. But, to the best of my knowledge
(and correct me if I'm wrong, as I know you will), I don't think
I've ever called your basic ethics and motives into question.

Yet you call mine into question on all too routine basis. In the
above post of yours, for example, you accuse me of stirring the
pot and wonder whether I edited your e-mail that I passed along
to Kimball.

I could care less how you personally interpret Kimball's
testimony, but I hope you'll agree that we're better - not worse
- off for having it archived here. If that's stirring the pot,
so be it. At least I threw something into the stew that might
not have been there otherwise.

So, I'm reminded of a scene toward the end of 'Patton' where
Patton and a Russian general finally toast each other as one
"sumbitch" to another.

The year is early, so I suggest that we toast each other as one
Boor to another and move on. Or is it Hyena?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:09:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:36:54 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 08:58:48 -0600

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >><snip>

 >>>Dennis -

 >>>This is really a very good point and one that I've thought about
 >>>quite a bit.

 >I'll read Dr. Randle's post again, but it seemed to me that that
 >was merely an opening phrase beginning the well reasoned and
 >detailed dismemberment of your shot from the hip, shallowly
 >conjectured, and suspiciously disruptive cynicism.

No, Alfred, it was actually a really very good point and one
that Randle himself had thought about quite a bit, just like he
said.

I mean, I knew you wouldn't believe me, but I thought you might
believe him.

Guess not.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                 Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates

From: Robert Gates  <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:14:32 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:40:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Gates


 >Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:07:15 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:20:14 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >>>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:40 -0600

 >>>Smith appears not to remember it this way.

 >>This is the impression I have had. As I asked before when this
 >>story surfaced, as _anybody_ including the principles telling or
 >>repeating the story _ever_ gotten any kind of confirmation from
 >>Smith in the form of email, letters or whatever. I suspect what
 >>Smith remembers and what Sheehan remembers are two totally
 >>different storys.

 >Here is the story. Oberg has talked to her about it, but Oberg
 >dares not speak lest he cast Marcia Smith adrift in a leaky life

Its also possible that she in fact never said the things
attributed to her by Sheehan.

 >Marcia Smith has never spoken publically on what she told
 >Sheehan about the Bush/Carter affair, nor about what files she
 >made available to Daniel Sheehan to view in mid 1977. She has
 >not spoken publically on the two reports Sheehan claims were
 >authored for President Carter. Marcia has said NOTHING, despite
 >an rumors you may have heard.

The point being is that she has said nothing, and will continue
to say nothing... likely because she has nothing to say about
the subject.

 >Daniel Sheehan has spoken many many many times about his
 >involvement. See story told to MUFON-LA:

 >http://www.mufonla.com/sheehan.ram


 >See story told to Jeff Rense:

 >http://playlist.broadcast.com/makeram.asp?id=546600


 >See story told to Strange Days... Indeed:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/sdiarchive/sdi093.ra

 >Also see Strange Days...Indeed Interview Transcript:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/jul/m16-015.shtml

 >Sheehan told parts of the story to convention in Santa Clara and
 >in Laughlin Nevada in September 2001. He told his story to Art
 >Bell, but you have to pay to hear it. I believe Sheehan told his
 >story at the May 9th Disclosure news conference in Washington.

Perhaps it is true, perhaps it isn't. He can tell the story 100s
of times and it still doesn't necessarly make it true. Recall
also the famous quote "I did not have sexual relations with that
woman..." told very publicly in front of hundreds of cameras,
broadcast globally, and re-run endlessly. Didn't change the fact
it was not correct.

Apparently, in essence, other then "Sheehan has said..." we can
get no independent confirmation, either through Congressional
records, or the questioning of people involved, say Marcia
Smith, so the bottom line is just another story being told in
Ufology about allegedly seeing classified records, photos of
aliens and so forth, all that can't be verified.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                     Re: he Roswell Debate - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:39:07 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:43:50 -0500
Subject: Re: he Roswell Debate - Mortellaro


 >From: Lawrence Fenwick <lawrencefenwick@interactive.rogers.com>
 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:18:45 -0500 (EST)
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)
 >Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 23:05:19 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Roswell Debate
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >Hi, Jim,

 >Thanks for your comment on my opinion about Roswell.

 >I've been 48 years in research, and have been frustrated and
 >baffled by most UFO reports, even after investigations of these
 >reports.

 >What I said reflects my emotional rather than my rational side.

 >Of course, we should still probe reports. Maybe one will give us
 >the proof we need. We probably have a better chance of sucess
 >than we'd have of the government admitting what it knows.


 >Larry Fenwick

http://interactive.rogers.com/lawrencefenwick/

Dear Larry, List, Errol,

My reactions are almost always emotional as well, but this is
because I've been trained by skeptics and skeptibunkers to react
in this manner. And in order to assuage the suicidal and
sometimes murderous feelings I get from some of the above
darlings, I react in one of my best voices (referring to the
ones in my head). And that would be my Gesundt voice.

That Gesundt guy is a pisher...

However, there is proof, the very same proof you seek. This
proof resides in the memories of those, like myself, who have
experienced both sightings as well as abductions. I neglected to
use my favorite word... _perceived_... that we have had the
abduction experience. The sightings are no perceptions at all.
These are quite real.

The problem is not proof, it is belief in what the abduction
experiencer has said. Thus far, the closest I can get someone to
admit to some measure of belief is, that they believe that we
believe what we've experienced.

Whilst not sufficient in my book, it is at least not the
snickering, snide, insulting and sarcastic waste of breath,
bandwidth and intellect which we've all observed here and
elsewhere. It must be difficult for Errol to read this stuff and
not say, "Crimey, I can't publish this tip trolling thru the
trollops... " or the Kanahoovian equivelent.

Also, when emotion comes into conflict with reason, emotion
always wins out. Additive, when emotion comes into conflict with
culpable ignorence, culpable ignorence always wins out. You may,
if you wish, substitute the inviolate and immovable object which
always blocks even some good minds... it's called the 'paradigm
block.' This block is usually driven by fear. Which is the mind
killer. I suppose that anyone who rants like the devil himself,
whether a skeptic, skeptibunker or just some jerk who thinks he
or she knows everything - doesn't. Sad ain't it?


Best,

Jim.....

The man who knows everything and even when wrong is right,
because when he knows he's wrong .. he's knows he's wrong...
therefore he's right..... [what'd I just say?]









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                                  Thank You

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:49:23 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:45:17 -0500
Subject: Thank You


With Errol's permission and way off topic... again,

Thank you for your voiced concern on-List and off and of course
for your positive thoughts and your prayers. Mom had her triple
bypass this morning and the proceedure went without
complications. Frankly, the risk for her was acute and her
chances were not very good... not very good at all. But, she
refuses to leave us... and in particular, me as I am her only
child. She does not see me as the old fart I am. She's the only
one ...

The man who performed the proceedure perfected the beating heart
bypass. Had it been a pump... mom would not be here to spoil me
rotten.


With sincere thanks,

Jim and our family









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 00:07:19 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:47:51 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Gates


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:18:31 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:18:05 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Dennis,

 >>Hate to mention this, but if you truly understood how government
 >>and classified material is handled you would have realized that
 >>this is not correct.

 >>For example most people would _assume_ that because the Vice
 >>President of the United States is number 2 man so to speak and
 >>he should/would know everything just because of his position.
 >>The fact is that the Vice Presidents only know what they have a
 >>need-to-know. Harry Truman as VP of the US had no knowledge of
 >>the Manhatten project, yet many people might 'assume' that he
 >>should have/would have known or have knowledge just because of
 >>his position. In one of the books on the Stealth project either
 >>Clarence Kelly or Ben Rich, they mentioned that the chain of
 >>command for this highly classified compartmentalized project was
 >>from the Skunk works, to a one Star AF general, to Secretary of
 >>Defense, directly to the President. Supposedly cut out of the
 >>chain on this was the Vice President, Joint Chiefs and a host of
 >>other military people that people would _assume_ would have
 >>knowledge.


 >Robert,

 >Every situation is different. James Nance Garner, Truman's
 >predecessor, famously referred to the Vice-Presidency as not
 >being "worth a bucket of warm spit." Which it pretty much wasn't
 >in 1947.

 >Do you seriously think Dick Cheney is in a similar position
 >today? Out of the loop, as it were?

Some people were absolutly shocked that Harry Truman was out of
the loop and would have said similar to what you said above.
Whether you want to believe it or not, Cheney would not be in
the loop on many things. Some classified projects only answer to
the President. The Vice President and many senior military
officers are left out of the loop because they don't have a
need-to-know.

 >>The other great myths are just because a person has a 'Top
 >>Secret' security clearance, or is cleared for higher access, in
 >>fact means they are entitled to read and know everything about
 >>the project they are working on. This is totally bogus. Even
 >>with a clearance, you are only allowed to access document that
 >>it is determined that you have a need-to-know.

 >No one said anything about Kimball reading documents. Do you
 >think that if Roswell had been on high alert and that alien
 >bodies were brought on base to be autopsied that only one or two
 >medical personnel would have been called out to handle the
 >situation?

As I have said in another message, Kimballs testimony is just as
meaningless as the public comments from people with TS security
clearances such as Colonels on down at the Air Force who
vehemently denied the existance of the Stealth fighter until the
program was declassified. The bottom line is they did not have a
need-to-know, so they were not told.

While you may attach great significance to Kimballs story, those who
understand how the system works would realize its not significant
whether it deals with bodies being brought in, or classified documents.
The fact is he was not involved, nor did he know anything.

<snip>

 >>It is likely that many people at the Roswell air base
 >(including >highly decorated, higher ranking people, had
 >absolutly no >knowledge about what happened because they did not
 >have a >need-to-know and were not told.

 >>Bottom line is just because a miltary person doesn't know,
 >>doesn't mean it didn't happen. Likewise if a military person is
 >>'quiet' about something it may mean he had no knowledge or it
 >>may mean he knew all about it and felt duty bound by his
 >>security clearances.

 >I have never said or suggested that because Kimball didn't have
 >any knowledge of alien autopsies that bodies were ipso facto
 >never recovered at Roswell. What I have maintained all along is
 >that his testimony needs to be considered in the context of
 >claims to the contrary. I hate to keep repeating myself, but
 >what is so difficult to understand here?

If we follow your line of thinking, then we should consider the
statements/testimony or whatever you want to call it, of the
various Air Force and DOD people who emphatically and pointedly
denied the existance of the Stealth fighter for 7 plus years.
After all what they said should be considered in the historical
context...! NOT. Again they are utterly meaningless.

 >>Also keep in mind that a so called lower ranking person and or
 >>lessor person on the chain of command totem pole may in fact
 >>know much more because they were cleared, where as higher
 >>ranking officers or leaders were not cleared. Just because a
 >>person is or was not cleared for a particular subject doesn't
 >>make the person bad or evil, he or she just didn't have a
 >>need-to-know and was not cleared.

 >Understood and kept in mind. But again, we're not talking about
 >a hypothetical, post facto situation here regarding the reading
 >of classified documents after the fact. We're talking about
 >breaking events. When Truman was swept up by the latter, he was
 >properly and promptly notified of the existence of the atomic
 >bomb.

Truman was notified because he had just become President,
otherwise he wouldn't have been told or notified. Consider the
fact that Colonel Paul Tibbits and some members of his squadron
had clearances and access to information and data the Vice
President of the US did not have. Gee whiz, it was wartime and
gulliable people would expect that the VP would be
told...especially during wartime! NOT

 >If Roswell had gone on high alert and several alien bodies had
 >been brought to the base hospital, don't you think there's at
 >least a possibility -- if not a downright likelihood -- that
 >Kimball would have been made aware of same, indeed, alerted to
 >participate?

I would think they wouldn't want the base to go on high alert,
after all it telegraphs a message that something is happening.

Picture being next to a STRATCOM base and you hear how bomber
crews are being recalled from leave, and or key officers and or
people are being recalled. Then the base goes on high alert
status. Instantly tells everyone that lives around the base or
town that something big is happening or going to happen.

The better thing to do is keep it low key, use only people you
absolutly have to have or need, let the base continue on as
"normal" and do whatever you have to do quietly, with as few
people as possible. Some instances that is not possible due to
the magnitude of the event but others it is.

 >And if not, why not? That's pretty much all you need concern
 >yourself with in this specific context.

Picture interviewing bomber crews that were stationed in the
south Pacific at the end of World War 2 concerning the 509th.
While most of them would tell interesting storys about what they
did and the missions that they were on, they really couldn't
contribute anything meaningful about the operations of the 509th
because they weren't in the loop.

Now you start interviewing people who served in the 509th. Many
people would 'know' things, but they wouldn't know 'everything'
because many of them weren't told everything.

Same thing is true about Roswell. While Kimballs story may be
very interesting it doesn't contribute anything.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                     Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly

From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:00:51 +1100
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 07:51:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Repeating Past Mistakes - Kelly


 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:24:24 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Repeating Past Mistakes

 >>From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
 >>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Repeating Past Mistakes
 >>Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:49:42 +1100

 >>Back in 1999 at a web site called The ScifiVine, I wrote about
 >>how we were thought of by other races in the Galaxy as being
 >>nothing more than a race of murderous barbarians and that we
 >>would never be allowed off this planet unless we changed our
 >>ways and some beliefs.

 >I wonder if any other races in this or other galaxies hate
 >themselves as much as so many human beings seem to?

I dare say there would be other races, unfortunately I'm not in
a position to ask questions like that first hand. But I sure
would like to be able too.

Though I don't hate my race or us, we are who we are. I'm just
pi__ed off at all the stupid mistakes we make and the fact we
know better.

 >>Money, guns, war, it is all humans seem to think about, besides
 >>sex.

 >So that pretty much finishes off art, literature, music,
 >philosophy, scientific enquiry, philanthropy, medicine and the
 >simple fact that most humans do seem to be able to rub along
 >quite happily without killing each other - despite all we have
 >witnessed lately.

Arr, now if this was all we were concerned with, then we would
have little to worry about.

 >>This leads me to the coming prophecies and one that stands out
 >>is about the end of Human Kind. If one reads or interprets the
 >>prophecies correctly, it does only say that Human Kind comes to
 >>an end as we know it now, and not all life on this planet- which
 >>is consistent with what has happened in the past.

 >And there are a lot of people - like Mr Kelly - who seem to be
 >hardly able to conceal their glee at the thought! (BTW, what is
 >a "coming rophecy"? Is it a prophecy that hasn't been prophecied
 >yet? Even smarter than a regular prophecy!)

I'm not sure what a rophecy is,(typo?) but a prophecy is a
prelude to a coming event. Which is said to be of sorts, a
warning for the wise.

 >>So is this coming doom nothing more than a big slap on the wrist
 >>of us getting it wrong yet again? Can we ever get it right? It
 >>is really sad when you think about it. We could be interacting
 >>with other races, visiting other planets, learning about our
 >>real past, (even though it might not be as grand as we would
 >>hope for) doing things we only thought we could dream about. Yet
 >>for a few selfish greedy mindless so and so's, none of this will
 >>happen for us, it will only ever be a dream.

 >Just so long as we don't get to interact to much with that
 >enlightened race which seems to be so keen on abducting us and
 >doing some rather unpleasant things to are innards.

That was my main concern, are we just being treated like some
third world country is treated. Take what they want from us when
they want it with no regard or respect for us by races like the
Grey's? Are we nothing more than a play thing to them? Question
I would really like to get answers to, should the opportunity
ever arise.

 >>I get depressed by all of this sometimes and wonder why I should
 >>be stuck on this planet of losers? Knowing too much is sometimes
 >>a curse and not a blessing. Being blissfully ignorant of such
 >>things has its advantages. But I am human and one with all
 >>others on this planet - part of the original sin. This original
 >>sin... is it that many years ago we ventured to other planets
 >>only to kill, plunder and return home with the spoils? It
 >>wouldn't surprise me if this were the case.

 >And I get depressed by people who, like Mr Kelly, live at a time
 >when the world is more peaceful - yes! - and prosperous for the
 >greatest number of people at any time in its history. Yes there
 >is a lot of misery happening around the world, but we're not
 >going to even begin to tackle it if we just sit around waiting
 >for some saviours from space to turn up and "interact" with us.

Most peaceful, prosperous time in history? Peaceful and
prosperous for whom? Is it prosperous for the Tasmanian
Aboriginal whom is now extinct? Or the Native people of the
Amazon whom want nothing more than to be left alone by major oil
companies? What about all the species that are now extinct? True
it is peaceful for them, but not a very prosperous time. Only
comets impacting on the Earth have killed off more species in
one go than what has been killed off in the last 100 years by
the West.

Yes you are right it is peaceful and prosperous for some, about
30 percent of the worlds population, but that is not what I
would call a great achievement. When all creatures both great
and small are included in your equation I will agree with the
above remark, until then I will go on demanding we get our act
together.

As for peaceful, I guess that depends on what part of the world
you are from, ask a child from a third world country how
peaceful their life is? I think many of them would disagree with
your definition of a peaceful world.

 >>Still, for some reason I hold a small glimmer of hope that one
 >>day we might raise above our evil ways, lay down our fears, put
 >>our faith in that which created us and not in weapons or money
 >>and join the rest of the Universe.

 >How about rising above our alleged evil ways through our own
 >efforts and letting the rest of the Universe just get on with
 >it's own affairs?

The problem seems to be that most planets are inhabited by races
not unlike how our planet was some 5000 years ago. Now you
cannot tell me that if some on this planet learnt about such a
planet and were able to reach it with ease, that nothing would
happen to the people of that planet?

Are you kidding, it would be a free-for-all, those poor people
wouldn't stand a chance. A flag would placed in the ground and
that planet would become the sole property of who ever it was
that got there first. This is not acceptable, we nor anyone has
the right to take advantage of a planet of people going about
their lives, just because we could go there with guns and think
we have the right to take what we want because in our eyes they
are a lesser people doesn't make it right. This is something
that has happen too often in our past and it seems to be
something that would happen in the future if we don't change
that way of thinking.

Even if we passed laws to outlaw this kind of thing happening
there would be those that would still go ahead and do it. This
is what seems too worry many outside of this solar system, which
is why their don't seem to want to take any chances of it
happening to them.

If we didn't look like we could make it into space, I don't
think they would give us a second thought, but we will be
travelling out into space a lot sooner than many people think we
will.

 >>I did, however, argue a point with those that told me about such
 >>things as we did sort of go from horse and buggy to space travel
 >>in one hell of a short period. My argument was that perhaps we
 >>had been interfered with, lead down the path of destruction
 >>through no choice of our own.

 >Maybe we are actually quite a clever species. I know this is a
 >difficult concept for some people to grasp. Curiously, the
 >people who have this attitude tend to be the people who like in
 >the most peaceful and prosperous parts of this planet. Maybe
 >they're not busy enough trying to improve their own lives by
 >their own efforts, like people in less fortunate areas, that
 >they have time to sit around and write stuff like this.

Clever, yes so clever we use fuels that do more harm than good
even though there are other fuels we could be using. So clever
that a creature that has been living in the same area for over
400 million years is made extinct for a shopping mall before we
even know it existed. So clever we feed animals drugs to make
them fatter then we eat these animals only later to find out we
now have problems finding new drugs to treat drug restraint
viruses because of the over use of drugs in the first place.

If we are so clever than why is it that we cannot see what it is
we are doing could be wrong? Why do we think that a people
living in a rain forest is wrong and they should be living like
the rest of the West? Who says the way they live is wrong? The
way they live will ensure they live many thousands of years and
they have lived that way for many thousands of years. So who is
the more clever them or us?

I do think we are a very clever people, it is just that the
really clever ones aren't in control; it is the greedy mindless
ones that have control.

Take Rockefeller for example, he brought oil to the world, it
made him so rich. Then he had a near death experience, after
which he wanted to undo all that he had done, stop the mining of
oil and give away all of his money. His family thought he had
gone mad and had him committed, he wasn't mad he was scared,
scared for Human kind for he saw first hand during his near
death experience what lay ahead for human kind because of oil.
Most of what he saw has come true, great Wars did come about,
many species are now extinct, both human and animal. pollution
is a big problem, the world is at each other's throat.
Discussions are made on the bases of what is best for making
money, not what is best for all on this planet all because of
oil.

So yes we can be very clever, but most of the time we let the
really stupid ones make all the decisions.

 >>I guess there is nothing more to say, but goodbye 21st century,
 >>hello Armageddon. Those that know about this have themselves a
 >>space ark or is that International Space Station? Not that I
 >>think it will do them much good, since by the time the dust
 >>settles they will have spent so long in space there will be no
 >>returning to the surface anyway. Though I wish them good luck.

 >>So as Bender would say "Bring it on Baby!"

 >As Rimmer would say, "Pur-leez!"

At the end of the day I am really doing nothing more than
planting a seed for change. Well, I hope it may one day grow
into a tree that helps us understand ourselves better. We as a
race can do some very wonderful things but we can also do very
terrible things, we need to understand this about ourselves,
then look far into the future and ask ourselves are we headed in
the right direction for if not, do we need to make changes?

If we are this truly clever race many see us as, then this
shouldn't be a hard thing to achieve. I don't expect to live in
a perfect utopia, but the way we are living at the moment seems
to favour the very few, not the very many and it hardly even
includes or takes into consideration the other species we live
here on Earth with let alone other races outside of our solar
system. So I see us as needing to make some changes, am I asking
too much of my fellow Human beings?

So yes Pur-leez! if you will for I am one that is sick or being
referred to as "Those Monsters third planet from the sun, other
side of the milky way, just look for the one with all the smoke
and pollution on it."


Chris (Tophar)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

             Signs of Life: On the Lookout for Extraterrestrial

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:21:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:21:07 -0500
Subject: Signs of Life: On the Lookout for Extraterrestrial

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/lifesigns_spots_020103.html

SETI: Search For Life

Signs of Life: On the Lookout for Extraterrestrial Sweet Spots

By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 07:00 am ET
03 January 2002

BOULDER, COLORADO - Looking for life elsewhere is a tough task
for human or robot. The good news is that the scientific skill
and tools to search for, detect and inspect extraterrestrial
life are advancing rapidly.

A revolution in the field of microbiology is afoot, along with
extraordinary progress in understanding the "geobiological"
history of Earth. And then there's growing amazement about life
on this planet and how it can survive and thrive even in the
most extreme and bizarre of environments. For example, within
the last ten years alone, more than 1,500 new species of
microorganisms have been discovered and genetically sequenced.

In a just issued report, Signs of Life, a multidisciplinary
group of scientists grappled with techniques and technologies to
detect evidence for extraterrestrial life - either on the spot
on other worlds, or within prime pickings hauled back to Earth
by robotic spacecraft.

Spurred largely by an April 2000 workshop held in Washington,
D.C., report findings and conclusions were pulled together by
the National Research Council (NRC) Committee on the Origins and
Evolution of Life.

"The report is based on a workshop that brought together a
healthy spectrum of senior experts and young researchers," says
Jonathan Lunine, co-chair of the committee and professor of
planetary science and physics at the University of Arizona in
Tucson. Many of the workshop attendees are developing techniques
to detect life, and modeling the environments in which such
techniques might be used on other planets, he explains.

John Baross, associate professor of oceanography at the
University of Washington in Seattle, also co-chairs the
committee.

"The discussion was vigorous and exciting. This is a different
world of life detection than that in 1976, at the time of
Viking," Lunine told SPACE.com.

Lunine feels the key to success in life detection in the field
is to try a range of techniques that vary in their specificity
and need for prior assumptions about the nature of life. Doing
so will maximize the chances for success in searches at the
planet itself.

"With returned samples, of course, one should throw everything
possible at the effort," Lunine explains.

The Committee on the Origins and Evolution of Life, Lunine adds,
is continuing its efforts with a study on the potential nature
of life that might be very different from terrestrial=85and how
one would go about detecting such life.

Elusive answers

Since the 1976 landings of two Viking landers on Mars, the
technological ability to spot life on celestial bodies has made
impressive strides. Furthermore, understanding the nature of
life and the concomitant power of analytical tools in the
biological sciences are viewed together as "one of the most
dramatic changes since Viking," the NRC report states.

In coming to grips with the central question of what is life,
the committee assumed that if life exists on other planets or
moons, it will be carbon based and dependent on liquid water.
Also, it will be self-replicating and capable of evolving.

The quest to find life beyond Earth involves answers to several
tough questions. For instance, how does one determine if there
are living organisms in a returned sample? Secondly, can living
organisms leave tell tale traces from earlier times that can be
found in a returned sample? Lastly, how does one determine
whether there are living organisms or fossils in samples
examined robotically on another solar system body?

Lessons from the "Mars rock"

Firm answers to these questions are elusive, reports the study
group. There are great uncertainties regarding the possible
range of chemistry and morphology that could constitute life.

The committee found that "there is a disconnect between those
techniques that have been developed to an exquisite degree of
sensitivity to identify terrestrial organisms and those that
could provide the greatest probability of detecting exotic life
forms from another planet."

"Given the extreme difficulty (or impossibility) of inductively
describing all possible living processes based on terrestrial
biochemistry, no single approach, or even combination of
approaches, will guarantee success on a given sample."

That view has been brought home, quite literally, by the ongoing
research of the often called "Mars rock" - the infamous ALH84001
meteorite. The claim of evidence for biological processes in
that rock of ages from the red planet remains controversial and
unresolved.

ALH84001 offers an important lesson in the fundamental
complexity of identifying the faint traces of present biology or
Martian life that is long gone.

"Perhaps even more difficult, if life or its remains is detected
in a sample, will be the determination of whether it is a
terrestrial containment from Earth, and if so, whether it was
delivered by the spacecraft or in the natural process of
cross-contamination via asteroidal or cometary impact," the
committee report adds.

Sterile approach

Dispatching high-tech gear to scout for life -- and not drag
along hitchhiking terrestrial microorganisms in the process --
is a difficult challenge, the committee notes. Spacecraft must
be sterilized to avoid tainting other planetary bodies with
Earth biology - a situation tagged as "forward contamination."

There remains, however, "intense debate", the NRC report
observes, over the level to which spacecraft sterilization
should be achieved for missions to particular solar system
bodies.

Firstly, sterilization must be done in such a way as to avoid
damaging spacecraft components.

One procedure -- sterilization via dry heating in an oven -- was
performed on the two Viking landers that searched for life on
the red planet. However, that approach puts harsh demands on
spacecraft components and leads to a substantial increase in
mission cost and, possibly, the chances of mission failure, the
report states.

Sterilization by particle irradiation of a space probe is an
alternative. Yet this technique may not reach all spacecraft
subsystems, particularly when the mission design dictates
shielding electronic components from ambient sources of
radiation. That type environment, for example, is found in the
Jupiter system.

Another worry is that radiation-tolerant bacteria may dictate
that irradiation levels exceed even the extraordinary levels to
be experienced during the prime mission phase of, say, a mission
to Jupiter's moon, Europa.

Titan: cold soak

Regaining access to all parts of a spacecraft before launch to
assure that sterilization has taken place is an unsolved
problem, the committee reports.

Flagged in the report is the very compact Huygens probe now en
route to Saturn. The lander is to be dropped off on that
planet's mysterious moon, Titan, by the Cassini interplanetary
spacecraft after arrival in 2004.

The European Space Agency-built probe was not sterilized to a
high standard on the grounds that the profoundly cold Titan
environment would sterilize the lander soon after landing. "Yet
Titan is itself a target for investigating advanced stages of
organic chemistry that on Earth might have led to life," the
report notes.

In the area of spacecraft cleanliness, the committee encourages
further work to refine sterilization approaches, with an eye
toward minimizing impacts on spacecraft cost and mission
success.

Hauling back the goods

Another hotly debated topic is that of back contamination,
whereby extraterrestrial samples brought back might harm
biological processes here on Earth.

At issue is whether organisms "out there" might exist that are
sufficiently different from terrestrial organisms "down here" to
escape laboratory detection, yet similar enough to pose a threat
to the health of our biosphere.

"In the debates about life detection and back contamination,
this 'niche' has not been explored to the extent that it should
be - in part because of the difficulties in answering the
question," the committee report states.

The committee recommends that a focused study be done in the
near future to address the detection of microorganisms with
varying degrees of nonterrestrial biochemistry, and the possible
threat that such organisms might pose to terrestrial organisms.

Similar in view from past studies on back contamination, the
committee report states that there are practical and societal
reasons for ensuring planetary protection for all interplanetary
missions.

"Although the probability that an extraterrestrial life form
could be pathogenic to humans, or even viable at all in the
terrestrial environment, is very low, it cannot be shown to be
zero," the report says.

Back in the lab

Due to the myriad of technical woes to overcome in returning
samples back to Earth, much of the search for life elsewhere may
initially be done "in situ", that is, on the spot, by robots.

One problem.

Many of the powerful and sensitive techniques for detecting life
in laboratories here on Earth are not yet "space rated". That
is, they are far too big, complex, and not ready for prime time
flight. That condition may remain so, at least in the near
future.

Because of the continuing rapid improvements in technology, the
committee reports, it is not appropriate to recommend a specific
set of techniques for in situ life detection at this time.
Pressing on with the design of innovative and "miniaturizable"
techniques for in situ life detection is encouraged.

It is an almost certainly that the most interesting locales from
the point of view of the search for life will not be the easiest
to get to. Finding those comfy niches that could be just right
for life today, or were in the past, suggests the committee, is
likely to mean landing in less-than-totally-safe sites.

"It remains unclear as to which environments in our solar system
should be searched for signs of life," the committee found,
beyond the general identification of planetary targets - such as
Mars, Europa, and Titan. "In large measure, we yet do not known
enough about these bodies to target searches in particular
locations."

Picking those extraterrestrial sweet spots will require a series
of missions, including orbital reconnaissance, followed by
up-close-and-personal perusals using landed vehicles.


[UFO UpDates thanks The Anomalist www.anomalist.com for the lead]









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                              Much More Mothman

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:44:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:44:48 -0500
Subject: Much More Mothman


Loren Coleman's New Book:

'Mothman And Other Curious Encounters'

http://www.lorencoleman.com/mothman.html


An interview with Loren Coleman:

http://www.13thstreet.com/site/common/view-content.jsp?id=ae8c3-eb77e-de460-
c2cd5&section=Features&R_N=9900


The Movie:

'The Mothman Prophecies' - in North American theatres January 25th

http://www.spe.sony.com/movies/mothman/


A Mothman Retrospective:

http://www.blather.net/archives2/issue2no5.html


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 07:00:27 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:47:29 -0500
Subject: Re:  New Year Agenda - Lehmberg


 >Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:09:40 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 08:58:48 -0600

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:26:40 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>><snip>

 >>>>Dennis -

 >>>>This is really a very good point and one that I've thought about
 >>>>quite a bit.

 >>I'll read Dr. Randle's post again, but it seemed to me that that
 >>was merely an opening phrase beginning the well reasoned and
 >>detailed dismemberment of your shot from the hip, shallowly
 >>conjectured, and suspiciously disruptive cynicism.

 >No, Alfred, it was actually a really very good point and one
 >that Randle himself had thought about quite a bit, just like he
 >said.

Wild blueberry horse feathers, Mr. Stacy. You took the opening
phrase of his concise but detailed rebuttal and quoted it out of
context as a joke to lighten a debate you were losing, continue
to lose, and ultimately can't _help_ but lose.

 >I mean, I knew you wouldn't believe me, but I thought you might
 >believe him.

It's not about a question of mere belief, Mr. Stacy. It's about
weighing the strength, reasoning, and validity of your arguments
against those of your opponents and finding your opponents
arguments banging off the base of the metaphoric instrument with
the vigor of some objective finality! Maybe you should take my
advise about the supplemental oxygen.

 >Guess not.

...it's not about "guessing" either.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                     Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:46:21 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 11:24:09 -0500
Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall - Hall


 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:21:14 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 00:54:47 EST
 >>Subject: Re: The Measure Of Dick Hall
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Personally I can reasonably doubt. Just because you get a grant
 >>does not mean you automatically have access to any and all
 >>information in the hands of the people giving the grant. Even
 >>without the information a person getting a grant could do an
 >>indepth job.

 >>Wasn't Stan Friedman given a grant by the FUND for research into
 >>the MJ-12 documents? If so was he given full and complete access
 >>to every particle of information and or videos in the hands of
 >>the fund as part of his research?

 >If not why not? Why would anyone say, I want to pay you to
 >research documents about X, Y or Z - but not the one's I've got.

 >Sounds pretty stupid to me, whether it's Friedman or Pflock who
 >has been put in that position.


John,

You know not whereof you speak. In the first place, the Fund
supports only specific, independent proposals for research
carefully delineated by contractual agreement, not studies of
our own files.

In the second place, the situation was not as Pflock stated. Our
contract with him had nothing to do with the videotapes; I just
reviewed that contract and am continuing to research this whole
affair to be sure of my facts.

The same applies to Friedman; his contract was to do specified
independent research.


- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 4 Jan 2002 08:49:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 12:23:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space - Cameron


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:14:32 EST
 >Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:07:15 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Marcia Smith On Future of Space

 >>Here is the story. Oberg has talked to her about it, but Oberg
 >>dares not speak lest he cast Marcia Smith adrift in a leaky life

 >Its also possible that she in fact never said the things
 >attributed to her by Sheehan.

This assumes, Sheehan, a prominent lawyer in Washington over the
last 30 years got up one morning and decided to make up some
bizarre tale about a weird subject that does not promote his
mission one bit. More than that, his made up story names two
prominent people in Washington science circles as being
involved. Possible. Yes, but don't bet the farm on it.

 >>Marcia Smith has never spoken publically on what she told
 >>Sheehan about the Bush/Carter affair, nor about what files she
 >>made available to Daniel Sheehan to view in mid 1977. She has
 >>not spoken publically on the two reports Sheehan claims were
 >>authored for President Carter. Marcia has said NOTHING, despite
 >>an rumors you may have heard.

 >The point being is that she has said nothing, and will continue
 >to say nothing... likely because she has nothing to say about
 >the subject.

She has said nothing because she has never been directed
approached. This is about to change.

<snip>

 >Perhaps it is true, perhaps it isn't. He can tell the story 100s
 >of times and it still doesn't necessarly make it true. Recall
 >also the famous quote "I did not have sexual relations with that
 >woman..." told very publicly in front of hundreds of cameras,
 >broadcast globally, and re-run endlessly. Didn't change the fact
 >it was not correct.

 >Apparently, in essence, other then "Sheehan has said..." we can
 >get no independent confirmation, either through Congressional
 >records, or the questioning of people involved, say Marcia
 >Smith, so the bottom line is just another story being told in
 >Ufology about allegedly seeing classified records, photos of
 >aliens and so forth, all that can't be verified.

He has told the story consistantly over the couple years he has
told it. You have posted twice and have already made a major
error in fact. Sheehan, in all his tellings of this story, never
once mentioned "photos of aliens". This is a further indicator
that Sheehan is probably telling it as it happened.


Grant

"It's always difficult to strike a balance between the public's
right to know and NASA's need for candor", said Marcia Smith, a
space policy senior analyst at the Congressional Research
Service in Washington, DC., as quoted by James Oberg









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                      'UFO/FBI Connection' Now Texbook

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 12:07:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 12:25:19 -0500
Subject: 'UFO/FBI Connection' Now Texbook


I have been informed that the UFO/FBI Connection has been
selected as a textbook for use in the UFO course taught at
Temple University by Dr. David Jacobs.

And, thanks to Dave, perhaps there will be new blood in ufology
after all (all we greybeards now have hope!).

see:

http://brumac.8k.com or amazon.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                          More Montana Mutilations

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:52:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:52:26 -0500
Subject: More Montana Mutilations

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/news/stories/20020103/topstories/1410092.ht=
ml

Thursday, January 3, 2002


Cattle Mutilations Back

Ranchers, lawmen baffled by crime wave

By KATIE OYAN
Tribune Staff Writer

CONRAD - This is the kind of d=E9ja vu Everett King could do
without.

About 15 years ago, he discovered the grisly remains of one of
his cattle that had died mysteriously.

In October, it happened again.

King said it looked as though a surgeon had sliced into his
7-year-old Charolais, the way its right eye and ear were cut off
- not to mention the way its reproductive organs had been cored.

What King finds most unusual, however, is that two months later
the carcass lies right where he found it, untouched.

"Predators won't eat it," said King, who ranches outside Valier,
south of Lake Frances. "It should have been cleaned up and gone
a long time ago."

Ranchers reported four mutilations between June and August.
Since then, there have been 11 more, and investigators are still
searching for answers.

The same bizarre circumstances haunted area ranchers and baffled
law enforcement 20 years ago, sparking rumors about UFOs, cults
and government conspiracies.

The mutilations went away in the '90s but began again this
summer.

The most recent victim - a 12-year-old Hereford - turned up
earlier this month on a ranch northwest of Conrad.

"They skinned off the belly from her front legs to her back legs
all the way around," Pondera County Sheriff's Deputy Dan
Campbell said. "The complete bag was removed."

The last few mutilations occurred within three miles of each
other in the Dry Forks area, about 10 or 15 miles west of
Conrad.

In October, members of the New Miami Colony, 18 miles west of
Conrad, discovered two mutilated cows at the same time, about 30
yards apart.

The scenes were remarkably similar to mutilations ranchers
reported here more than a decade ago, Campbell said.

Most of the cows had the skin scraped off their faces. Often,
the tongue, one eye and all or part of an ear had been removed.
Part of the udder usually was cut off, as well as the genitals.
And in most cases, the anus had been cored.

A majority of the cows were 4 or 5; one was missing its teeth.

In the late '70s, a high volume of alleged mutilations in
southwestern states prompted a federally funded investigation.
The resulting 300-page report concluded that animal predators
were responsible.

Although some dismiss the Pondera County deaths as a hoax or
chalk them up to natural causes and predators, Campbell and
fellow investigator Sheriff's Deputy Dick Dailey say they aren't
convinced.

Cuts on the cows are often circular or oval and - as with
Everett King's Charolais - seem to be made with surgical
precision.

The animals seem to bloat faster than normal, and their missing
hide doesn't reflect the work of predators, Campbell said.

"I've never seen an animal eat just the face off a cow when
there's lots of other stuff to go after," he said.

One mutilated cow looked like it had been burned. Another seemed
to have bruises around its neck as though it had been strangled.
One had a long cut with a perfectly ridged edge, as though the
hide had been sliced with a tool similar to pinking shears.

Also strange is that in most cases, no tracks or footprints were
detected around the animals' bodies, even in mud or snow.

A misconception is that the cows have been drained of blood.
Natural coagulation only makes it look like the creatures'
fluids have been drained, Dailey said.

Dailey, who lives in Dupuyer, spent several nights this fall
camped out in dark fields, trying to catch the culprit in the
act. He has reviewed all the facts and checked out dozens of Web
sites looking for answers.

Still, nothing.

"I've read everything I can read on it, and I really don't know
what in the heck it is," he said.

Ranchers aren't sure what to think, either.

In September, Jim VandenBos discovered the body of one of his
$850 2-year-old Angus lying dead in his pasture.

The right side of its face was skinned, and the exposed jawbone
was so smooth it looked like it had been polished, VandenBos
said.

Its tongue was cut off along with its right ear, eye and
reproductive organs. A tennis-ball-sized patch of skin on its
shoulder was hard like plastic.

Again, coyotes - even other cattle - steered clear.

VandenBos has been ranching southwest of Valier for more than 30
years and remembers the last wave of mutilations well.

"It's kind of a spooky thing", he said. "I haven't worried
about it too much because it's something I can't control - but
I'd like to find an explanation."

Toward the end of October, a neighbor found the 750-pound steer
that died in Glen and Ruby Bouma's dry creek bed, three miles
west of Conrad.

"There was a little trail of grass pushed up like it was shoved
up underneath it.", Ruby Bouma said.

The hide was missing from the calf's stomach and its
reproductive organs were gone, but there were no tracks, no
bullet holes and no claw marks.

The calf, No. 55, was almost a year old and was worth about
$600. It was one of the friendliest animals the Boumas owned.

A local vet said it died of dust pneumonia, but Glen and Ruby
have their doubts.

"That's possible, because it's so dry.", Ruby Bouma said. "But I
think we would have known if it was sick. We took special notice
because it was one of two calves that were like pets to us. It
would come up and smell your hand or your pantleg."

The whole thing is peculiar, if you ask the Boumas. When a cow
dies of natural causes, for instance, predators will usually
chew into its flesh.

Glen and Ruby's calf was missing only its hide. And when they
checked on Thanksgiving Day, predators still were keeping their
distance.

Some folks in the area think the U.S. Air Force or aliens are
behind the mutilations, but not Ruby.

"I'm sorry, but I personally think it's somebody local ...
that's doing it for kicks," she said.

One difficulty local investigators have encountered in cracking
the case is gathering evidence.

After two or three days, collecting evidence becomes a lost
cause because the cattle are so badly decomposed.

And in the summer, carcasses rot faster and often go
undiscovered for weeks.

"We have to fight time," Campbell said. "We're hoping that this
time of year, ranchers are gathering and feeding every day so
we'll get a better jump on them and come up with some more
clues."

Pondera sheriff's deputies also are hoping a Nevada laboratory
will answer some of their questions.

This fall, Campbell and Dailey chopped the head off a mutilated
cow, packed it in dry ice and shipped it to the National
Institute for Discovery Science in Las Vegas.

The privately funded institute pays scientists and retired
police officers to investigate bizarre phenomena including
mutilations and UFO sightings.

A spokesman from the institute said researchers are nearly
finished with their study and will be sending a copy of the
report to the Pondera County sheriff's office in a couple of
weeks.

"If they could come up with something, that would really help
us." Dailey said.

Until investigators reach a satisfactory conclusion, theories
continue to spread through local coffee shops and bars.

Some say the mutilations are a government ploy to get Montanans'
minds off global issues. Others finger satanic cults or
spaceships.

Most say they don't believe in all that eerie X-Files stuff. But
even some of the staunchest skeptics are beginning to wonder.

"I just can't believe little men are coming from outer space.",
said Conrad resident Jack Rowekamp, a retired bus
driver and custodian. "But I guess you never know."









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                            British MOD UFO Study

From: Dave Clarke <cd292@crazydiamonds.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:29:06 -0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 16:51:20 -0500
Subject: British MOD UFO Study


Source: Yorkshire Post (Leeds, U.K.)

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk


4 January 2002

UFO COVER-UP REVEALED

The British Government had its own version of the X-Files, and
for decades denied the fact. Only through the dogged
perseverance of a Yorkshire researcher did they eventually come
to light, as STEPHEN BISCOE reports.


AT the height of the Cold War, UFO fever was so rampant in the
UK that the Ministry of Defence set up a secret working party to
try to establish if Earth really was under observation by
visiting aliens.

It involved experts from the Directorate of Scientific
Intelligence and the Joint Technical Intelligence Committee, and
eventually they produced a report. Then the MoD spent the next
49 years denying it ever existed.

Yesterday, the Public Record Office (PRO) made the papers
public, but only after their existence had been admitted to a
local government Press officer.

Had it not been for Dr David Clarke,it is unlikely that they
would have come to light.

Clarke combines his local government job with an academic career
which has made him one of the country's leading folklore
experts.

A researcher at the National Centre for English Cultural
Tradition at Sheffield University, he is the author of several
books on a range of folkloric traditions.

His latest book Out of the Shadows, to be published in May by
Piatkus, draws on the two years of research he has been carrying
out for a post-doctoral study.

In the course of it, he came across references in official
government documents to the report of the secret working party
set up on Churchill's orders in 1950 to investigate reports of
UFO sightings.

In 1980, the 30-year rule ended its term of confidentiality -
but the rule was ignored and it remained secret. Clarke says, in
fact, that he was repeatedly told by the MoD that no such report
existed; it even denied the existence of the working party. Yet
the Sheffield researcher was still coming across references to
both.

He was being lied to - and so was Parliament. In 1955 and again
in 1962, the Yorkshire Conservative MP Major Sir Patrick Wall
asked questions in the House about the report, and each time was
told that there had been no formal study.

Those who knew otherwise might have thought it contained such
startling data that the Government dared not risk causing panic
by making it public.

Clarke was certainly so intrigued that he kept up his pesterings
until eventually, in May last year, the MoD actually admitted
that the report did exist - and furthermore, allowed him see it.

What he read astounded him because nothing in it even hinted
thatthe researchers believed in an extra-terrestrial invasion.
Indeed, the authors dismissed the claims of UFO sightings as
"optical illusions and psychological delusions" - or just plain
hoaxes.

They wrote: "We consider that no progress will be made by
attempting further investigation of unco-ordinated and
subjective evidence, and that positive results could only be
obtained by organising throughout the country, or the world,
continuous observation of the skies by a co-ordinated network of
visual observers, equipped with photographic apparatus, and
supplemented by a network of radar stations and sound locators."

They concluded: "We should regard this, on the evidence so far
available, as a singularly profitless enterprise. We accordingly
recommend very strongly that no further investigation of
reported mysterious aerial phenomena be undertaken, unless and
until some material evidence becomes available."

One of the cases they examined involved Flight Lieutenant Stan
Hubbard from York who, in 1950, described having seen, on two
different occasions, "a flat disc, light pearl grey in colour,
about 50 feet in diameter" flying low over the Royal Aircraft
Establishment at Farnborough at speeds of 800mph to 1,000mph.

The authors of the report said: "We find it impossible to
believe that a most unconventional aircraft, of exceptional
speed, could have travelled at no great altitude, in the middle
of a fine summer morning, over a populous and air-minded
district like Farnborough, without attracting the attention of
more than one observer."

Hubbard did not know about this conclusion until Dave Clarke
tracked him down to his home in Virginia and sent him a copy of
the report. He reacted angrily to its dismissive tone. Hubbard
said that at the second sighting, a few weeks later, he was with
five other test pilots on the roof of the control tower waiting
for one of their colleagues to make a landing - and all of them
saw it.

One of the five was Wing Commander Frank Jolliffe, and Clarke
has spoken to him, too. Jolliffe said he was interviewed by MoD
agents who appeared to be taking his account seriously - and
until he saw the report, he had gone on assuming that that had
been the case.

After the MoD allowed Clarke to see the report last May, it was
sent to the Public Record Office which released it on Wednesday
along with the 1901 Census and other once-confidential
documents.

Clarke says: "The fact that it has taken half a century for
these papers to come to light shows how keen the MoD have been
to conceal their interest in the subject of UFOs.

"Rather than coming clean at the time, they decided to keep the
contents of this report secret, which has given rise to all the
claims of Government cover-ups and conspiracies that lie behind
the X-Files mythology.

"What they were covering up was not knowledge of alien visitors,
but simply the fact that they did not have any real answers.

"At that time, at the height of the Cold War, flying saucers
could have been Russian aircraft or missiles and so a policy of
silence was thought to be the safest policy.

"These papers show there was a cover-up, but it was a cover-up
of ignorance not of any secret knowledge."











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

                       Re: Roswell 'Threads' - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:50:05 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 16:54:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Threads' - Gehrman


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:45:16 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Roswell 'Threads'

 >This type of photo analysis adds support to the growing body of
 >photo analysis by others indicating that the debris in the FW
 >photos does not appear to support rawin target debris. That does
 >not mean that the debris is from a alien space ship. It just
 >means that the rawin target theory is losing it's credibility.
 >However, as Neil has indicated, when you study the photos in
 >detail, there is without doubt, items in the debris which appear
 >to represent today's technology and not technology that existed
 >in 1947.


Andrew,

Thanks for your efforts to unravel the Fort Worth debris puzzle.
I'm surprised that your measurements have not received any
comments from the List but I have one question: How are you sure
that your measurements using the carpet stripes are accurate?
Could you explain?


Ed

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Subject: Re: Roswell 'Threads'
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:50:05 -0800


 >Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:45:16 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Roswell 'Threads'

 >This type of photo analysis adds support to the growing body of
 >photo analysis by others indicating that the debris in the FW
 >photos does not appear to support rawin target debris. That does
 >not mean that the debris is from a alien space ship. It just
 >means that the rawin target theory is losing it's credibility.
 >However, as Neil has indicated, when you study the photos in
 >detail, there is without doubt, items in the debris which appear
 >to represent today's technology and not technology that existed
 >in 1947.


Andrew,

Thanks for your efforts to unravel the Fort Worth debris puzzle.
I'm surprised that your measurements have not received any
comments from the List but I have one question: How are you sure
that your measurements using the carpet stripes are accurate?
Could you explain?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 4

               Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:05:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 17:31:28 -0500
Subject: Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank - Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 12:51:58 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

 >>Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:08:42 -0500
 >>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: BBC News: 'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

 >>Source: BBC News

 >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1740000/1740189.stm

 >>Thursday, 3 January, 2002, 10:18 GMT

 >>'UFO Unit' Drew Blank

 >>There have been many sightings in the UK The Ministry of Defence
 >>set up a unit to look at UFO sightings in the 1950s but found no
 >>evidence of aliens, newly-released official documents have
 >>revealed.

 >>The joint group was formed in 1951 after a spate of sightings in
 >>Sweden and the US sparked a "notable outbreak" of reports in the
 >>UK.

 >>But the experts from the Directorate of Scientific Intelligence
 >>and the Joint Technical Intelligence Committee dismissed the
 >>prospect of alien arrivals.

 >>They said sightings were "optical illusions and psychological
 >>delusions" - or just plain hoaxes.

<snip>

 >>But conspiracy theorists sticking to the idea of a transatlantic
 >>cover-up of alien activity are likely to pick up on the fact
 >>some parts of the dossier are still withheld.

 >The BBC of course would think nothing odd about parts of a
 >dossier being withheld - unless of course it had to do with
 >their annual budget being cut and the reasons for same
 >were withheld. And they are babes in the woods to be sure if
 >they don't think that people and governments conspire.

 >Notice how that word gets tossed about these days - one of those
 >politically incorrect words. I see it bandied about even in our
 >provincial legislature, particularly whenever a cabinet minister
 >doesn't want to answer a question. "That honourable member sees
 >conspiracies everywhere, Mr. Speaker."

 >Note though that the BBC did pick up on the fact that parts of
 >the dossier were withheld. Why wouldn't they ask why?

 >Don Ledger


Good questions Don.

Does anyone know the security level of the material that was
released?

How in the world would these characters know that nobody else
saw the event mentioned near Farnborough? Did they make a
serious effort with requests through the media for other
observers to report? Or was this another example of absence of
evidence is evidence for absence? Little late now to go looking.

I remember, in Southern California, getting 30 responses to a
Letter To The Editor from me in a local paper, stimulated by 2
calls to me. Turned out to be a plastic bag with candles, but
all the observations were consistent and quite accurate. Many
had tried to report what they saw, but were laughed at by
police, radio stations, etc... Often there were many witnesses
to the event.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                           Secrecy News - 01/04/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:22:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:15:08 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News - 01/04/02



SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 2
January 4, 2002


**      NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW STILL CLASSIFIED
**      DOE IG FAULTS NUCLEAR WEAPON INSPECTIONS
**      SOME REAGAN PAPERS RELEASED
**      WHAT ABOUT THE CIA?


NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW STILL CLASSIFIED

The Bush Administration's long-awaited Nuclear Posture Review,
which defines the structure of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and
proposes "a significant change" to it, was transmitted to
Congress on December 31, but only in classified form.

"I have asked our folks to see if we can take that classified
version and declassify it," said Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld at a January 3 press briefing. "Because of its
importance and because of the new direction it takes, I think it
belongs in the public in some form." See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/npr.html


DOE IG FAULTS NUCLEAR WEAPON INSPECTIONS

The Department of Energy has not investigated defects and
malfunctions in nuclear weapons in a timely fashion, according
to a recent DOE Inspector General (IG) report.

"In some instances, confirming the need for an investigation
took over 300 working days," according to the report. "Once
initiated, the majority of investigations examined [by the IG]
were open more than one year."

The findings "raise serious concerns about the process the
Department has employed to maintain a satisfactory confidence
level in the nuclear weapons stockpile."

The December 18 report is posted here:

http://www.ig.doe.gov/pdf/ig-0535.pdf

See also "Report Finds Shortcomings in Energy Dept. Arms
Testing" by Walter Pincus in the January 3 Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54073-2002Jan2.html


SOME REAGAN PAPERS RELEASED

Eight thousand pages of Reagan Administration papers were
unsealed January 3 out of 68,000 pages that are subject to the
Presidential Records Act.

The partial release came pursuant to a Bush Administration
executive order which imposes new restrictions on public access
to such records.

A detailed inventory of the new release is available here:

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/p5inv010302.htm

Despite the release, "The legality of the [Bush] executive order
is still very much a live issue," according to Scott Nelson of
Public Citizen, who represents a coalition of historians and
public interest organizations that have filed suit to challenge
the Bush order. See:

http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=979


WHAT ABOUT THE CIA?

The terrorist attacks of September 11 clearly rank among the
biggest failures of U.S. intelligence.

Put another way, the events of September 11 are bound to hold
extraordinarily important lessons for every aspect of
intelligence, from structure and function to interagency
coordination to personnel, information dissemination, and so on.
The very definition of intelligence - its essential attributes
and whom it is supposed to serve - may be ripe for
reconsideration.

Yet the lessons of September 11 may go unlearned because of the
positive aversion in official Washington to asking the questions
about intelligence that need to be asked. An attempt to
establish a statutorily-based investigative commission was
recently derailed in the House of Representatives.

"The reason for drawing heightened attention to this single
greatest failure of American intelligence since Pearl Harbor is
that no official steps have so far been taken to find out how it
could have happened," writes Thomas Powers in the latest New
York Review of Books.

Powers presents the views of CIA's most ardent critics: "a vocal
group of former intelligence officers - mostly young, mostly
field officers from the Directorate of Operations, mostly
well-respected and destined for solid careers until they chose
to leave - who believe that the CIA is in steep decline."

But even those who disagree with those critics told Powers that
what ails the CIA cannot be remedied without a thorough and
officially sanctioned investigation.

See "The Trouble with the CIA" by Thomas Powers in the New York
Review of Books (17 January 2002) here:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15109

Last month, Senators Joseph Lieberman and John McCain announced
their own initiative to establish an investigation of the events
of September 11.

"With the first stage of the war against terrorism now drawing
to a close," said Senator Lieberman on December 20, "and with
many perplexing questions still before us, we must now begin in
earnest the process of finding answers to how it happened."

Accordingly, Senators Lieberman and McCain introduced a pending
bill (S. 1867) to establish the "National Commission on
Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States." See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_cr/s1867.html


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message:
subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:  www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                        Re: More Montana Mutilations

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:50:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:29:18 -0500
Subject: Re: More Montana Mutilations


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers ->
 >Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 1:52 PM
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: More Montana Mutilations

 >Source: Great Falls Tribune [Montana] OnLine

 >http://www.greatfallstribune.com/news/stories/20020103/topstories/1410092.=

html

 >Thursday, January 3, 2002

 >Cattle Mutilations Back

 >Ranchers, lawmen baffled by crime wave

 >By KATIE OYAN
 >Tribune Staff Writer

 >CONRAD - This is the kind of d=E9ja vu Everett King could do
 >without.

 >About 15 years ago, he discovered the grisly remains of one of
 >his cattle that had died mysteriously.

 >In October, it happened again.

<snip>

I am from Great Falls, Montana - Cascade County - and the animal
mutilations occur all the time.

As far as the 70's are concerned, around a camping area called
'Jumping Creek', many ranchers' private land butts up to the
federal lands there. It was so common at the time the locals
didn't even raise an eyebrow.

But, the most fascinating thing that we found - myself and Air
Force Lt. husband - was that the military were always on scene.
They wouldn't allow us into the area until they were through.

Great Falls and area also has high numbers for Big Foot and UFO
sightings.

Malmstrom Air Force Base is about 2 1/2 miles north of the town.

Jean Meiners









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 20:13:59 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:30:54 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:38 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >An old curmudgeon of the CIA, a guy who went back into the 50's
 >as I recall (but I don't recall his name... although I would
 >recognize it, It think), was called to testify to Congress on
 >behalf of Gates. Mr. Curmudgeon testified as follows based on
 >what Casey had told him in the early 80's (paraphrase):

 >"It is true that Gates knew nothing of it. Casey told me 'I
 >don't tell Gates everything."

 >End Of Story

Bruce,

The only problem with this story is that we don't know if the
CIA Curmudgeon told Congress the truth or not. Nor do we know if
Gates was telling the truth or not. Maybe he was merely trying
to save his own behind.

But assuming everybody's telling the truth, we still don't know
if Casey specifically told Gates about Iran-Contra or not. For
all we know, Casey could have told Gates about Iran-Contra, but
not the part about UFOs.

In which case everyone involved would have been truthful.

But it still wouldn't be the End of the Story.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:32:37 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 00:07:19 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Same thing is true about Roswell. While Kimballs story may be
 >very interesting it doesn't contribute anything.


Robert,

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think it does
contribute something in the context of whether the base was
under general alert at that time (as some have alleged), and
whether there was unusual activity at the hospital (which some
have alleged), which is where you would think bodies would have
been brought, if only to be prepared for immediate transport
elsewhere. (And I guess you wouldn't need any medical supplies
for that, which Kimball seems to have been in charge of.)

But on to another aspect. Do you happen to know when
compartmentalization and its need-to-know corollary became
official policy within the US intelligence establishment?

In other words, when it would have been official policy _not_ to
inform Truman of the existence of the atom bomb? Or was he not
informed out of personal and/or political reasons on Roosevelt's
(or his advisors') part?

I realize we've always had chain-of-command and similar
procedures to protect sensitive intelligence, but when did
compartmentalization and need-to-know become officially
institutionalized?

I recently read the second volume of a new two-volume biography
of Hitler (the name of the author of which escapes me, but he's
an Englishman and I believe the book is called "Nemesis" etc.).
If memory serves, the author credited Hitler with the invention
of both.

When was it established in the US and given an official
oversight structure? Who, in other words, would have been in
charge of determining who had a need to know?

Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer
would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project.
But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project
structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating
policy.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                      Re: New Year Agenda - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 01:41:37 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:34:46 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Mortellaro


 >Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 16:50:29 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:51:05 -0500

 ><snip>

 >>Your evident knowledge that secrets cannot be kept has evidently
 >>escaped the poor slobs who still think that things still remain
 >>unknown after 40 years.

 >>Please contact them at:

 >>http://www.cia.gov/cia/contact.htm#web

 >>The CIA needs you.

 >Serge,

 >I thought you knew that I already worked for the CIA.

 >Oops, guess the secret is out now!

Dear Serge, List, Errol,

Dammit, Serge, why the heck did you have to raise this issue.
Now everyone knows about this Stacey character. Well, (sighs) I
suppose that I must now reveal yet another secret. I mean, since
Stacey is an agent for the CIA, and every CIA operative has a
handler, I confess. I, Gesundt, the greatest voice ever to live
in Jim's head, admits to being Dennis Stacey's Handler.

Now you know... the... rest... of the story. And if you should
desire more information, just write me. But please keep it all
under your hat. Dennis up 'til now, didn't know he had one. And
it is written (somewhere) that we are known for the fiends...
friends, sorry... we keep.


Jim for Dr. G.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:37:07 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:38 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:40:46 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 16:37:20 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 ><snip>

 >>>[Kimball] My response: I am at a loss to understand how you can
 >>>state that I had no clearance to the flight line or hangars. The
 >>>fact is, I had a Top Secret clearance and was very often on the
 >>>flight line and in many of the hangars for a variety of reasons,
 >>>including participation in training programs, familiarization
 >>>programs, and taking actual flights in different aircraft,
 >>>including training missions. Also, staff meetings were held by
 >>>Major Comstock for the express purposes of sharing information
 >>>about what was going on not only at the hospital but on the base
 >>>in general and to discuss any unusual problems. I did not
 >>>perform my duties, and there were many, in a vacuum.

 >>Dennis, List, all -

 >>Let me make a few observations here. First, a top secret
 >>clearance does not mean automatic clearance to see all top
 >>secret material. There is such a thing as need to know which
 >>disqualifies many who hold top secret clearances from getting
 >>into material that they have no need to know .

 >My favorite story about 'need to know' goes like this. I heard
 >this on TV/radio _many_ years ago so I may have some details
 >wrong, but here goes.

 >In the early 80's under Reagan, Bill Casey was DCI (Director of
 >Central Intelligence). His 2nd in command was one Robert "
 >Bobby" Gates. You will recall all the Iran/Contra nasty stuff
 >that was going on in those days (supporting a revolution in
 >Nicaragua in spite of Congressional direction to NOT fund any
 >such thing, as I recall).

 >Anyway, Casey died. In the latter half of the '80's Bobby was up
 >in front of Congress to be approved as DCI. Nasty congressman
 >were throwing the Iran Contra affair at Gates, claiming that he
 >was involved and hence had no moral authority to be DCI---- of
 >something like that. Gates was denying involvement, saying he
 >knew nothing of the particular affair that some Congressmen were
 >trying to pin around his neck. The Congressmen couldn't believe
 >that Gates was innocent... after all he was #2 at the agency.
 >_Surely_he_would_have_known_everything_about_IRAN_CONTRA_! (It's
 >only _logical_ you know!) (Can't you just see some Congressman
 >pounding hius shoe on the desk as he emphasizes this point?) Now
 >we come to the reason for this story:

 >An old curmudgeon of the CIA, a guy who went back into the 50's
 >as I recall (but I don't recall his name... although I would
 >recognize it, It think), was called to testify to Congress on
 >behalf of Gates. Mr. Curmudgeon testified as follows based on
 >what Casey had told him in the early 80's (paraphrase):

 >"It is true that Gates knew nothing of it. Casey told me 'I
 >don't tell Gates everything."

 >End Of Story

Let me add another example of compartmentalization at very high
levels.

Historian Stephen E. Ambrose in his fascinating 1981 book 'Ike's
Spies: Eisenhower and the Espionage Establishment' on pages 240
and 241 talks of the 5412 committee chaired by MJ-12 member
Gordon Gray and including the Secretaries of State and Defense
and the DCI. No covert action could be taken without their
approval. These actions would not go before the full National
Security Council because "it was a whole big roomful of people".

Shades of McCoy's Secret (not Top Secret code word) briefing to
a USAF Scientific Advisory Panel.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Pflock

From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:24:37 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 11:34:03 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Pflock


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 01:41:37 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


Jim et al,

 >Gesundt, the greatest voice ever to live
 >in Jim's head, admits to being Dennis Stacey's Handler.

Gesundt lies! It is I, Kurt Peters, who is Stacy's case officer.

-- MJ-13.572









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:56:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 16:02:01 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer
 >would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project.
 >But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project
 >structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating
 >policy.

 >Dennis Stacy


List,

I found this, which is pretty interesting, by doing a Google
search using the words compartmentalization and need to know.

http://www.hanford.gov/docs/rl-97-1047/site_security/role.htm

It's a fairly good summary of those subjects, so some of you
might want to bookmark it or make a copy.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 12:03:53 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 16:05:43 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Randle


 >Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 00:07:19 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer
 >would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project.
 >But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project
 >structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating
 >policy.


Dennis, List, All -

All we need to look to is the breaking of the Japanese codes
during the Second World War. Access was limited to just a few
people in very high places. When they learned that Yamamoto was
going to be flying close to the front lines during an inspection
tour, they had to decide whether it was worth the risk to attack
his plane and risk the compromise of "Magic" (the code name for
the Japanese intercepts and not to be confused with "Majic") or
let the airplane go. The decision had to be made in the White
House with those flying the mission never knowing how it was
discovered.

In the Southwest Pacific, commanded by MacArthur, only he and
his chief of intelligence, Brigadier General Charles A.
Willoughby (See the Combined Fleet Decoded by John Prados)  knew
about the existence of Magic, which means it was a closely held,
closely guarded, compartmentalized secret.

Given that Magic developed before the war began, and worked
through the war, we know that this sort of secret (or top secret
for those who like to split hairs) was compartmentalized even if
it wasn't called by that name.

What this demonstrates is that there are secrets and then there
are secrets and some are closely held and kept and others are
widely held and leak. One of the great fears was that the
Japanese would learn that we could read many of their coded
messages and change the codes. The ability to read their codes
lead directly to the victory at Midway, which provides some
perspective as to its importance.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                       Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:08:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 16:08:47 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Salvaille


 >From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:24:37 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 01:41:37 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >Jim et al,

 >>Gesundt, the greatest voice ever to live
 >>in Jim's head, admits to being Dennis Stacey's Handler.

 >Gesundt lies! It is I, Kurt Peters, who is Stacy's case officer.

 >-- MJ-13.572

Karl, Jim and especially you Dennis Stacy,

This is all BS.

My boss tells me that, at the CIA, we don't make domestic
operations unless there is a foreign link to it... Otherwise, it
is outside our jurisdiction.

Nice try. A less experienced agent would buy the fact that you
are blowing your cover to alleviate a debate you are loosing.

BS again.

You are either CSISOP or NSA.

Since some of you interventions do show some pertinence and
wits, you are definitely not CSISOP.

NSA? hmm... Your posts always contain a mix of truth and
deception. Could be...

Unless... yeah...

Dennis STacy... DST!!!

"Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire", a French secret service...

Parlez-vous fran=E7ais?

:)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:11:51 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 16:12:43 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400

<snip>

 >Shades of McCoy's Secret (not Top Secret code word) briefing to
 >a USAF Scientific Advisory Panel.

Stan,

I think even more important than the Secret classification of
this meeting of the AFSAP, was the fact that Project Sign, which
McCoy headed, was classified at a very lowly Restricted level.

Yet I have seen Karl Pflock claim that McCoy and Project Sign
would certainly have known about any crashed saucers because
they were charged with investigating the saucers.

( e.g., you can view his NBC Today show debate with Kevin Randle
where he says this:

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/609170.asp )

Unless crashed saucers were classified at only a Restricted
level, this is clearly a bogus argument.

Pflock also claims that this is the most convincing evidence he
has seen to date that there was no saucer crash at Roswell. If
this is the _best_ he can come up with, then obviously the
Roswell case is alive and well.

For a document from McCoy stating that Sign was classified at
only a Restricted level, Updates readers can go to:

http://www.blackvault.com/documents/ufos/janaug/janaugwpafb97.htm

In the preceding series of documents, McCoy had been trying to
get a UFO radar surveillance network set up, ironically first
starting with the AF weather service because they used radar to
track the RAWIN weather targets. They begged off and passed him
to Watson Labs, who then sent him to the Air Defence Command.
The ADC agreed to cooperate and send on any UFO cases, but
wanted to classify them Secret. To this McCoy responded:

"Paragraph 6 of 7th Indorsement states that required reports
will be classified 'Secret'. Project 'Sign' bears the
classsification 'Restricted'. Therefore, reports should not be
classified higher than 'Restricted' unless the source or unusual
circumstances warrant higher classification."

McCoy was practically begging them not to send more highly
classified material because of the very low classification of
Project Sign. Yet Pflock claims McCoy _surely_ would have known.
Obviously this is complete nonsense.

The same is true of all other documents where the authors claim
there is no physical evidence, such as the Twining memo of Sept.
23, 1947 urging the formation of Project Sign. That was
classified at a higher Secret level, but still not high enough
to have revealed the existence of a crashed saucer. Furthermore,
it was Twining's intent to have the memo distributed to a large
number of government agencies he wanted to participate in his
proposed future saucer investigation, whereas acknowledgement of
a saucer crash would have highly restricted access.

If Pflock can produce a Top Secret document with Twining flatly
denying the existence of a crashed saucer to somebody like Pres.
Truman or Gen. Vandenberg then maybe I could buy this argument.
Otherwise there is nothing to it.

Will Karl Pflock respond to this?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 5

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 08:38:46 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:46:17 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Hatch


 >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:56:15 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer
 >>would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project.
 >>But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project
 >>structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating
 >>policy.

 >>Dennis Stacy

 >List,

 >I found this, which is pretty interesting, by doing a Google
 >search using the words compartmentalization and need to know.

 >http://www.hanford.gov/docs/rl-97-1047/site_security/role.htm

 >It's a fairly good summary of those subjects, so some of you
 >might want to bookmark it or make a copy.

 >Dennis


Hello Dennis, all:


The entire article is a good read. I have a thick book here
someplace, at least one chapter is devoted to just those
security concerns. As I recall, at least one case was discussed
where a Hanford worker opened his yap a little to wide and was
promptly sacked.

It appears to me that compartmentalization and need-to-know were
clearly and uniformly enforced... even if those same policies
had somewhat different names back then.


Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: I have a pet peeve with certain auto-repair shops which seem
to believe the customer has no need-to-know about the finer
details of the work done.

They will kick you right out of the shop for Insurance Reasons.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 6

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:13:05 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 09:20:49 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:11:51 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>Shades of McCoy's Secret (not Top Secret code word) briefing to
 >>a USAF Scientific Advisory Panel.

 >Stan,

 >I think even more important than the Secret classification of
 >this meeting of the AFSAP, was the fact that Project Sign, which
 >McCoy headed, was classified at a very lowly Restricted level.

<snip>

David,

Why don't you tell the List to whom McCoy's Secret statement was
addressed? Aren't they just the sort of people you would expect
to be invited into MJ-1,2 rather than excluded from it?


Dennis









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 6

              Re: Report On Montana Mutilation - Sanchez-Ocejo

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 20:25:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 09:25:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Report On Montana Mutilation - Sanchez-Ocejo


 >From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: NIDS: Report On Montana Mutilation
 >Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 14:49:18 -0800

 >Enclosed is a summary of an investigation we conducted on a
 >reported animal mutilation in Montana in June 2001. Some of your
 >readers may be interested in the contents of the full report
 >(approx 50 pages) that has just been published on the What's New
 >section of the NIDS web site:

 >http://www,nidsci.org

 >Sincerely,

 >Colm Kelleher
 >NIDS

Dear Dr. Kelleher,

I would like to start by wishing you a Happy New Year. I just
took a look at your wonderful report on the cattle mutilations
in Montana. I want to express my congratulations to you and your
research team.

I believe that the format you utilized for this amazing report
should be a prime example to follow for other organizations that
investigate these phenomena, perhaps even for my investigative
team. I can only describe your report as ground-breaking and
inspirational for other researchers investigators.

I couldn't help to notice some amazing similarities between some
of the mutilated cows and the mutilated animals in Chile,
especially the time period when all of these phenomena took
place - June of 2001.

Another astonishing similarity that left my colleagues with
their jaws open was the cookie-cutter wounds on these animals. A
few months ago, investigator Jaime Ferrer found out about a
female pregnant dog that died under very similar circumstances
in Calama, Chile. The animal had precision cuts inflicted upon
its skin, as well as round cookie-cutter precision cuts.
Furthermore, it had all of its fetuses extracted from its wound.

My colleagues and I believe that it's imperative that we make
this information and evidence available to you. We are currently
gathering all the raw data from the attacks that took place last
year in Chile. I hope that it's helpful to you and your
wonderful research team. We will organize it and present it to
you the best way possible. I hope this helps us corroborate or
establish a possible link or similarity between these cases.

If you're interested, I look forward to fully cooperate with you
and your research team. I will do my best to provide any
information or evidence you might need. I will contact you as
soon as I have the evidence in a presentable manner. I hope we
can establish a working relationship. Before I go, please
congratulate your research team for me.


Sincerely yours,

Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 6

               Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession' Video

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 07:55:22 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 11:49:52 -0500
Subject: Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession' Video


With regard to that Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession'
Video

[See:

http://rense.com/general18/dbed.htm

--ebk]

Perhaps NY film-maker Mike Zieper is to be congratulated for
making a useful social statement on the overly surreal nature of
our "Interesting Times" and NOT be penalized in some rational
(but severe) fashion for needlessly and maliciously straining
abundantly shocked and too well abused sensibilities...

Perhaps Mike Zieper is a genuine 'artist' mindful of an artist's
sensibility and legitimately expressing, for us, some artistic
truth useful in an aggregate self-education, and so should NOT
be soundly pilloried for wasting our time (...always
increasingly more precious...) researching the facetious facts
of bogus stories in frustrating, frivolous and facile
futility...

Perhaps Mike Zieper is a playful cinematic scamp skillfully
rubbing our senseless noses in our own embarrassingly ready (and
perhaps too easily provoked) credulity, and should NOT be fined,
flogged, or fulsomely fire-walled for communicating a serious
threat already communicated too well by our desultory
governments and other closed, and closed minded, institutions...

Perhaps Mike Zieper (AKA 'Mr. Z.') has an appreciable talent and
demonstrates a rare cinematic adeptness that should be admired,
celebrated, and rewarded, and should NOT be drawn and quartered
in the traditional sense for further muddying waters already
impossible to see through... for amplifying the contrived
shadows while simultaneously provoking mistrust in whatever
remains of the dwindling light...

This writer suggests, of course, the latter over the former...

Hoaxing the paranormal crosses a different kind of line because
it is crying the worst kind of "wolf". There's valid stuff in
the paranormal realm that goes ignored when this kind of wolf is
cried. Worthwhile investigations go unperformed when that kind
of wolf is cried... Scrutiny is avoided. Research is
discredited. Inspections are not provided for. Examinations are
dismissed. Explorations are not funded. Inquests go uncalled.
Inquiries are forgotten. Righteous inquisition is made far less
likely...

...Legitimate anomaly becomes the false alarm of a sociopathic
lack-wit's specious wolf cry!

Mike Zieper created a disturbance of the efficacious peace,
plain and simple, good reader. Every UFO fraud, contrived crop
circle, and phony Bigfoot report is a detraction from the core
of legitimacy of these things and more. It's an unrecognized
psycho-social crime with countless victims and the people that
cooperate to perpetrate these bogus paranormal reports are
criminals guilty of the worst kind of conspiracy. That
conspiracy is the conspiracy to encourage ignorance, incite
complacency, or foment the hapless individual's cognitive
indifference and intellectual apathy!

It's not entertainment; it is misinformation. It is not art,
because it does not tell a truth. It is not even good cinema
because even a pile of dog dirt will film brilliantly if it's
singing show tunes and River Dancing.

No, Mike Zieper has performed no valuable service here; he has
only provided for more corrosion, poured sand in already
grinding gears, and poked us all in our aggregate paranormal
eye. Mike, make no mistake, bites.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
www.alienview.net

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see
from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, scourged by
the scurrilous.

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 6

                             Translators Needed

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 10:53:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 12:42:59 -0500
Subject: Translators Needed


Hello All,

Volunteers are needed to translate several short paragraphs
into as many languages as possible. The results will be
posted for use by international respondents.

Translators, please for the following:

Arabic     [All]
Balkan     [All]
Chinese    [All]
Danish
Dutch
Finnish
Flemish
French
German
Greek
Korean
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Norwegian
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian
Slavic      [All]
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Ukranian
Vietnamese

the major African tongues and any other not listed above.

If you can help, please contact me, privately, via:

john@virtuallystrange.net

Volunteers are asked to keep the content of the translations
private until formal, world-wide, public announcements are
made.

Your assistance is appreciated.


Regards,

John Velez









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 6

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:27:58 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 13:39:41 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak


 >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:13:05 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:11:51 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400

 >><snip>

 >>>Shades of McCoy's Secret (not Top Secret code word) briefing to
 >>>a USAF Scientific Advisory Panel.

 >>Stan,

 >>I think even more important than the Secret classification of
 >>this meeting of the AFSAP, was the fact that Project Sign, which
 >>McCoy headed, was classified at a very lowly Restricted level.

 ><snip>

 >David,

 >Why don't you tell the List to whom McCoy's Secret statement was
 >addressed? Aren't they just the sort of people you would expect
 >to be invited into MJ-1,2 rather than excluded from it?

Dennis,

As usual, your reasoning is impeccably backwards. Even if we
assume the AFSAP was full of "MJ1,2" types ("MJ1,2" no doubt
representing the early days of "MJ12"), how could somebody
(McCoy) from a program of low classification (Sign) tell them
Top Secret material if he didn't have access to it?

Furthermore, even if you assume he did have such access, McCoy
would have to take into consideration the level of
classification of the meeting and _everybody_ inside it. Would
they _all_ have the proper clearance and access? If even one
didn't, he couldn't say anything.

This exchange, however, has prompted an e-mail from Wendy
Connors, who imforms me that Col. McCoy wasn't even in charge of
Project Sign, as I assumed. Alfred Loedding, who organized the
Project with Dr. Carroll, ran it on a daily basis and Albert
Deyarmond was his supervisor. A Lt. Smith did the administration
portion of the project.

She also disagrees somewhat with my assessment of what the
members of Sign would have known. Although Sign was classified
at a lowly Restricted level, they could receive documents at a
higher level from other participating agencies. (Such higher
classified documents and their contents, I presume, would have
remained internal, not for outside dissemination, because of
their higher classification.)

As to what Sign and McCoy knew about Roswell, Wendy writes:


"As to whether McCoy would know if a crashed disc was located,
he might not have known. There are two pieces of documentation I
have that would support this, but of course, not perfectly
provable. First is Lt. Col. Andrew J. Hemstreet, who declared in
an interview, that Loedding was sent to Roswell to check on the
flying disc incident and that they (all the SIGN guys) had heard
of the recovery, but that 'only Loedding would have known the
full details.'

"Secondly is the testimony of Major Victor Bilek, who stated
that Lt. Col. Hemstreet was basically correct except for who
went to Roswell. He stated that it was George Towles who went
and that Col. McCoy was furious that Towles wouldn't report to
him what he had investigated. Hemstreet was 94 years old when
interviewed, so even though he had the name incorrect, his
memory of someone from SIGN going to Roswell was correct, as
Bilek confirmed it.

"Before dismissing this piece of the puzzle as insufficient, I
must point out that Towles' actual job at Wright Field was
accepting all shipments to the base, assigning tracking numbers
and ensuring that the materials made it to the appropriate
sections. In other words, Towles was the man who would know if
debris from a crashed disc was shipped to Wright Field from
Texas.

"Also, according to Major Bilek, Towles told him and others that
he accepted something relating to the incident, but refused to
say anything further."


What this would suggest is that McCoy may have heard the rumors,
but wasn't fully in-the-know. At best, all McCoy could tell the
AFSAP was that he had heard rumors of physical evidence b








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

              Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:55:09 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 12:42:16 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Rudiak


 >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:13:05 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:11:51 EST
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400

 >><snip>

 >>>Shades of McCoy's Secret (not Top Secret code word) briefing to
 >>>a USAF Scientific Advisory Panel.

 >>Stan,

 >>I think even more important than the Secret classification of
 >>this meeting of the AFSAP, was the fact that Project Sign, which
 >>McCoy headed, was classified at a very lowly Restricted level.

 ><snip>

 >David,

 >Why don't you tell the List to whom McCoy's Secret statement was
 >addressed? Aren't they just the sort of people you would expect
 >to be invited into MJ-1,2 rather than excluded from it?

Dennis,

As usual, your reasoning is impeccably backwards. Even if we
assume the AFSAP was full of "MJ1,2" types ("MJ1,2" no doubt
representing the early days of "MJ12"), how could somebody
(McCoy) from a program of low classification (Sign) tell them
Top Secret material if he didn't have access to it?

Furthermore, even if you assume he did have such access, McCoy
would have to take into consideration the level of
classification of the meeting and _everybody_ inside it. Would
they _all_ have the proper clearance and access? If even one
didn't, he couldn't say anything.

This exchange, however, has prompted an e-mail from Wendy
Connors (the resident expert on Project Sign), who informs me
that Col. McCoy wasn't even in charge of Project Sign, as I
assumed. Alfred Loedding, who organized the Project with Dr.
Carroll, ran it on a daily basis and Albert Deyarmond was his
supervisor. A Lt. Smith did the administration portion of the
project.

She also disagrees somewhat with my assessment of what the
members of Sign would have known. Although Sign was indeed
classified at a lowly Restricted level, they could receive
documents at a higher level from other participating agencies.
(Such higher classified documents and their contents, however,
would have remained internal, not for outside dissemination,
because of their higher classification.)

As to what Sign and McCoy may have known about Roswell, Wendy
writes:

"As to whether McCoy would know if a crashed disc was located,
he might not have known. There are two pieces of documentation I
have that would support this, but of course, not perfectly
provable. First is Lt. Col. Andrew J. Hemstreet, who declared in
an interview, that Loedding was sent to Roswell to check on the
flying disc incident and that they (all the SIGN guys) had heard
of the recovery, but that 'only Loedding would have known the
full details.'

"Secondly is the testimony of Major Victor Bilek, who stated
that Lt. Col. Hemstreet was basically correct except for who
went to Roswell. He stated that it was George Towles who went
and that Col. McCoy was furious that Towles wouldn't report to
him what he had investigated. Hemstreet was 94 years old when
interviewed, so even though he had the name incorrect, his
memory of someone from SIGN going to Roswell was correct, as
Bilek confirmed it.

"Before dismissing this piece of the puzzle as insufficient, I
must point out that Towles actual job at Wright Field was
accepting all shipments to the base, assigning tracking numbers
and ensuring that the materials made it to the appropriate
sections. In other words, Towles was the man who would know if
debris from a crashed disc was shipped to Wright Field from
Texas.

"Also, according to Major Bilek, Towles told him and others that
he accepted something relating to the incident, but refused to
say anything further."

What this would suggest is that McCoy may have heard the rumors,
but wasn't fully in-the-know. At best, all McCoy could tell the
AFSAP was that he had heard rumors of physical evidence within
Sign but nobody would tell him anything definite (and boy was he
steamed). However, it's rather doubtful McCoy would dare say
such a thing.

Furthermore, even if McCoy had been given definitive knowledge,
he would have to know for sure that _everybody_ in that room had
the proper clearance to hear it. The only way he could know that
would be to have full clearance himself and know of everybody
similarly cleared to have such knowledge. This is getting to be
a bit much. McCoy would practically have to be a member of MJ-12
himself to know all this.

To deduce there was no saucer crash at Roswell because of
McCoy's denial at the AFSAP meeting is to deduce way too much.
As I said in my original post, if you could find a Top Secret
dispatch from Gen. Twining to Pres. Truman or Gen. Vandenberg
denying the same thing, then you'd really have something.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 12:05:56 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 12:45:52 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:27:58 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >What this would suggest is that McCoy may have heard the rumors,
 >but wasn't fully in-the-know. At best, all McCoy could tell the
 >AFSAP was that he had heard rumors of physical evidence b



David,

Thanks for passing Wendy's comments along. That's good
information to have.

I also got the following from Karl Pflock:

"McCoy was the chief of the Air Materiel Command intelligence
dept (Technical Intelligence Division, T-2). Project Sign was in
his dept., so the project reported to him. Everything that went
forward from Sign up the chain of command did so over his
signature or only with his approval, and everything that came
into AMC in re saucers went thru him. He was very actively
engaged in Sign's work. Check out ch. 15 and pp. 315-318 of my
book.

"So, yeah, you could say McCoy was 'in charge' of Sign, altho'
he never was the project head."

It seems strange, to me, anyway, that Towles would know of
Roswell debris being shipped to Wright-Pat and that McCoy
wouldn't.

BTW, did the above get cut off?

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                         Re: New Year Agenda - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 23:03:19 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 12:48:31 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Gates


 >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:56:15 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer
 >>would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project.
 >>But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project
 >>structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating
 >>policy.

 >>Dennis Stacy


 >List,

 >I found this, which is pretty interesting, by doing a Google
 >search using the words compartmentalization and need to know.

 >http://www.hanford.gov/docs/rl-97-1047/site_security/role.htm

 >It's a fairly good summary of those subjects, so some of you
 >might want to bookmark it or make a copy.

 >Dennis

That was a good article. It illustrates a point I attempted to make many
months ago.

That being, _if_ a group was working on a crashed saucer and
dead ET bodies, one group would be working only on say the
propulsion unit while another group would be working on the
medical (i.e. dead bodies) and perhaps another group would be
working on the controls and so forth. The groups would likely
have no knowledge of what the other group or groups had found
out, or what they were pursuing, they would only know what their
group was doing. Likewise each group would operate under a
different codeword, so they couldn't share any information, even
if they wanted to. It would also be likely that the group leader
would report to somebody higher up the vine, and the person or
members of our high level group higher up the vine may be the
only person(s) who knew the "complete picture."

Also we need to keep in mind that information classified at a
compartmentalized level, say TS/Codeword is _not_ shared at
briefings, meetings, or in written documents at a lower level of
classification such as Top Secret, or TS different codeword,
Secret or otherwise.

Vice President Harry Truman was not in the "need-to-know" loop.
A number of high level, high ranking people were not in the
"need-to-know" loop. As Groves put it "...each man should know
everything he needed to know to do his job and nothing else."

Today we can make the case that there are in fact high level,
compartmentalized projects that high ranking officials that many
people would presume/assume would "know about" are not in the
need-to-know and don't know anything about.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                          Translators Still Needed

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 00:07:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 12:54:42 -0500
Subject: Translators Still Needed


Hello All,

Volunteers are _still_ needed to translate several short
paragraphs into as many languages as possible. Results will be
posted for use by international respondents.

I now have translations in three (3) languages covered and
translator's names and organizations are next to the languages
below. I thank them for their speedy response to my request and
for their generous offer of their time and assistance.

I will continue to post the list to UFO UpDates until enough
commitments to perform translations into the many different
languages listed have been secured.


Translators, still needed, please, for the following:

Arabic     [All]
Balkan     [All]
Chinese    [All]
Danish
Dutch      Frits Westra -- Editor UFO-Niewsbrief
Finnish
Flemish
French     Gilles Milot, Quebec Association of Ufology
German     Alfred Lehmberg
Greek
Korean
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Norwegian
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian
Slavic      [All]
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Ukranian
Vietnamese

the major African tongues and any other not listed above.
As you can see, we still have a long way to go.

If you can help, please contact me, privately, via:

john@virtuallystrange.net

Volunteers are asked to keep the content of the translations
private until formal, world-wide, public announcements are
made.

Your assistance is appreciated.


Regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                        Italian UFO Newsflash No. 339

From: Edoardo Russo <e.russo@cisu.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 08:12:41 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 17:53:57 -0500
Subject: Italian UFO Newsflash No. 339


ITALIAN UFO NEWSFLASH

ISSUE NO. 339 -  3 JANUARY 2002

by the Italian Center for UFO Studies
(Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici, CISU)

Contents:

- UPIAR: UFO Bookstore On-line
- The Passing Of Two European Pioneers In Ufology
- C.I.S.U. On-line Surpasses The 200,000-Mark


              UPIAR: UFO Bookstore On-line

The UPIAR Cooperative is to turn twenty-years-old in 2002,
having been created in 1982 as the ideal continuation of the
National Committee for Investigations of Anomalous Aerial
Phenomena (CNIFAA), in order to provide a more formal structure
to the publishing of the prestigious magazine UPIAR (=93UFO
Phenomena International Annual Review=94) and to the organization
of ufological events such as the International Colloquium on
=93Human Sciences and UFO Phenomena=94 (held in Salzburg in July of
that same year).

Having become (in 1986) the publishing house for the Italian
Center for UFO Studies (CISU), the Cooperative has now debuted
on the Internet the first Italian e-commerce site dedicated to
UFOs: books and magazines which it has published itself or
originating from international sources; a used-items
marketplace; rare items for collectors and UFO-themed objects of
interest; as well as all C.I.S.U. publications, not to mention
membership to the Center or subscription to its publications,
are now conveniently on display and available for purchase at
the Website www.upiar.com.

[Communication by Maurizio Verga.]


          The Passing Of Two European Pioneers In Ufology

On December 28th in Spain, there died at 76 years of age
Professor Manuel Pedrajo G=F3mez, a pioneer of Iberian Ufology and
author in 1954 of Los platillos volantes y la evidencia (=93Flying
Saucers and the Evidence=94), the first book on flying disks
published in Spain.

[Anomalist, 29 December; El esceptico digital, 31 December;
reports by Matias Morey and Roberto Labanti.]

Another recent loss was that in Germany of Karl Veit (age 74),
who from 1956 through 1988 had headed the cultist UFO group
DUIST (Deutsche UFO/IFO-Studiengesellschaft); published the
magazine UFO Nachrichten (for many years practically the sole
ufological reference in the German language); and translated,
for its own publishing house (Ventla Verlag), books on the most
famous contactees of America (from Adamski to Fry) and the
entire world (from the South-African Klarer to the Italian
Dibitonto).

[Ovni-Sciences, EuroUfoList, 31 December; communication by Bruno
Mancusi].


             C.I.S.U. On-line Surpasses The 200,000-Mark

Shortly before year=92s end, C.I.S.U. On-line (www.cisu.org)
surpassed the 200,000-visitors  benchmark, as it continued to be
the most-visited (in addition to the first) homepage of an
Italian ufological association on the Internet, not to mention
the richest (over 1,200 files encompassing more than 38
megabytes).

Switching over to a new provider, meanwhile, was the other
Website of the C.I.S.U., UFO On-line (www.ufo.it), following a
few weeks=92 absence from the Net, which with its 447,000 visitors
but first and foremost owing its enormous catalogue of cases,
texts and images  contributes to making the Italian Center for
UFO Studies the principal reference point for telematic Ufology
in the Italian language.

[Reports by Gildo Person=E8 and Maurizio Verga.]


Collaborators on this edition were: Roberto Labanti, Bruno
Mancusi, Gildo Person=E8 and Maurizio Verga.

- - -

This is the English translation of UFOTEL, a free phone/Internet
information service on UFOs edited weekly by  Edoardo Russo for
the Italian Center for UFO Studies (Centro Italiano Studi
Ufologici), available in Italian by calling +39-011-545294, or
by e-mail subscription, or on CISU website at
http://www.arpnet.it/ufo/ultime.htm

UFOTEL is a supplement to "UFO - Rivista di
informazione ufologica", published by the Italian
Center for UFO Studies, registered at Tribunale
di Torino,  No. 3670, on 19 June 1986.
Director: Giovanni Settimo.
Publisher: Cooperativa UPIAR, Corso Vittorio
Emanuele 108, 10121 Turin, Italy

Translated from Italian to English by:
Gary J. Presto, Freelance IT-EN Translator/Proofreader
1123 Revere Beach Pky., # 12
Revere, MA 02151 USA
Tel.: ++ 1.781.485.1683, Fax: ++ 1.781.485.1684
ICQ: 110502923, E-mail: gjpresto@mediaone.net
Webpage: http://profiles.yahoo.com/italoman9

- - -

(c) 2002  by: CISU,
Corso Vittorio Emanuele 108,  10121 Torino, Italia

This newsletter (as a whole or in part) may be freely copied,
photocopied, reproduced, stored, distributed and retrieved, at
the only condition that Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici is
reported as the source.

You may get it directly via e-mail by subscribing (just send a
blank message to:
cisuflash-subscribe@yahoogroups.com)

The CISU is a no-profit association whose aims are:
- to promote the scientific study of UFO phenomena in Italy;
- to help circulate information about UFO phenomena and studies;
- to coordinate national activities of data collecting and studying.

You may reach Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici:
- by mail: CISU, Corso Vittorio Emanuele 108, 10121 Torino, Italia
- by phone: +39 (011) 329.02.79 (24 hours UFO Hotline)
- by fax: +39 (011) 54.50.33
- by Internet e-mail: cisu@ufo.it
- at the World Wide Web URL: http://www.cisu.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 13:05:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 17:58:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell 'Threads'
 >Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:50:05 -0800

 >>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:45:16 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Roswell 'Threads'


Ed posed the following question to Andrew Lavoie regarding his
measurement of the Fort Worth debris, as Andrew is still in the
process of subscribing to UpDates he's asked me to post the
following reply to Ed's question. Neil.

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

 >Andrew,

 >Thanks for your efforts to unravel the Fort Worth debris
 >puzzle. I'm surprised that your measurements have not received
 >any comments from the List but I have one question: How are you
 >sure that your measurements using the carpet stripes are
 >accurate?

 >Could you explain?

 >Ed


Ed,

The method I'm using I believe is very accurate. The key to
measuring the debris is to obtain the mesaurement of an item for
which there would be no doubt about it's dimension. I was able
to obtain this by identifying the type of heating radiator used
in Ramey's office using Neil's scans and three engineering
mechanical design sources. Once the radiator was identified, I
was able to obtain the sectional width of the radiator. Knowing
the sectional width, which is a solid measurement, the radiator
and the carpet stripes were modeled. As a cross check, I took a
measurement of the radiator height and it was within +2.7% of
the required design height for this type of radiator.

The proof in the pudding though was to measure a piece(s) of
debris for which I knew the measurements of. The debris items I
could identify with was the two stiffners which intersect each
other in the RameyDubose photo. Professor Moore provided me with
very precise measurements of the stiffners in millimeters. The
first set of sketches I forwarded to Neil was of the stiffner
located on the floor. I could not reconcile the dimensions of
that stiffner to any of Professor Moore's measurements. The
measured height of the stiffner was out by - 66% and the width
by -131% as compared to Professor Moore's dimensions. It appears
that this stiffner may not belong to the rawin target. I was
able to reconcile the height of the stiffner attached to the
panel with Professor Moor's measurement, but not the width of
the stiffner. The height of the stiffner was within 99% of
Professor Moore's measurement but the width was smaller by about
- 66% or 2/3rds. As well, the overall shape of the stiffner did
not look like what you would expect to see based on Professor
Moore's measurements.

I hope this helps,

Andrew










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                     Eras News: Weekly Briefing 01-07-02

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 16:27:15 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:08:06 -0500
Subject: Eras News: Weekly Briefing 01-07-02



ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

January 7, 2002

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
1.7.02


Our Cosmic Habitat

http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books/library_rees_020104.html


Signs of Life: On the Lookout for Extraterrestrial Sweet Spots

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/lifesigns_spots_020103.html


Ancient Mars: Renderings Show Raging Floods, Vast Oceans

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ancient_mars_020104.html


Floating City to be Launched in 2006

http://www.rense.com/general18/float.htm


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project, providing
the latest news, reports and updates, including the Weekly
Briefing, sent free to your e-mail.

To subscribe to Eras News, send a blank e-mail to:
erasnews-subscribe@topica.com

To unsubscribe from Eras News, send a blank e-mail to:
erasnews-unsubscribe@topica.com

Or go to:

http://www.topica.com/lists/erasnews

Eras News Archive:
http://www.topica.com/lists/erasnews/read


The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies project focusing
on 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.

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

=A9 The Eras Project, 2002









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

             Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 12:05:57 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:13:09 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete] - Lehmberg


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:55:09 EST
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:13:05 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:11:51 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >>>>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 08:58:16 -0400

<snip>

 >To deduce there was no saucer crash at Roswell because of
 >McCoy's denial at the AFSAP meeting is to deduce way too much.
 >As I said in my original post, if you could find a Top Secret
 >dispatch from Gen. Twining to Pres. Truman or Gen. Vandenberg
 >denying the same thing, then you'd really have something.

Additionally, it may be possible to infer that something
untoward occurred at Roswell as a result of no report at all.
The smart money is on the fact that something (of some peculiar
classification) occurred there, but there is no mention of it at
all in Ruppelt's 'Report on UFOs'. I'd suggest that Ruppelt was
warned off the subject of Roswell when he was debriefed upon
leaving the service. The absence of any reference to Roswell in
his book when it filled the headlines of the time is significant
_because_ of that absence.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 7

                      Re: 'Little Green Men' - Gonzalez

From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 21:03:51 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:32:24 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men' - Gonzalez


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:27:54 EST
 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >This was a question that we researched carefully, back about a
 >decade ago. Around the turn of the century (the last one, not
 >the most recent), there was a comic strip know as The Yellow
 >Kid, which was printed in yellow ink. It was wildly popular and
 >newspaper editors kept tempting the writer with bigger pay
 >checks and more perks so that he jumped from one newspaper to
 >the next (and hence the term Yellow Journalism). To combat this,
 >one editor created The Green Man, which was printed in green ink
 >and dealt with a man from another world. Hence the idea that
 >people not of Earth were green.

As one of Martin Kottmeyer's helpers during his investigation
into the origins of LGM I am very much interested in your
reference.

Can you point us to any illustration?
Preferably on the Web?


Yours,

Luis R. Gonz=E1lez








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                        Death Bed Corn Session a Hoax

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:00:30 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 07:38:19 -0500
Subject: Death Bed Corn Session a Hoax


The following URL points to a piece exposing the Mike Zitzer...
Zipper... Zieper's 'Death Bed Confession' as a hoax. Well, we
all knew that, didn't we?

http://www.rense.com/general18/dbed.htm


Jim M









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                      Re: 'Little Green Men' - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 18:28:00 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 07:44:15 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men' - Lehmberg


 >From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'
 >Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 21:03:51 +0100

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:27:54 EST
 >>Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>This was a question that we researched carefully, back about a
 >>decade ago. Around the turn of the century (the last one, not
 >>the most recent), there was a comic strip know as The Yellow
 >>Kid, which was printed in yellow ink. It was wildly popular and
 >>newspaper editors kept tempting the writer with bigger pay
 >>checks and more perks so that he jumped from one newspaper to
 >>the next (and hence the term Yellow Journalism). To combat this,
 >>one editor created The Green Man, which was printed in green ink
 >>and dealt with a man from another world. Hence the idea that
 >>people not of Earth were green.

 >As one of Martin Kottmeyer's helpers during his investigation
 >into the origins of LGM I am very much interested in your
 >reference.

 >Can you point us to any illustration?
 >Preferably on the Web?


Vallee writes in his 'Anatomy of a Phenomenon' in 1965 on
page 153:


      Are these sightings coherent, and what are the
      characteristics most often attributed to their
      'entities' by the authors of such reports? What do we
      obtain if we seek to extract the chief features from
      these accounts?

      Let us hurry to claim that 'little green men', which
      everybody seems so fond of, have never been described
      in reality.

      "It is a curious fact," remarks I. Davis, "that it
      seems impossible to discover the exact origin of the
      word 'green' with saucer occupant reports. Where and
      when the expression 'little green men' was first used,
      by whom, why or in connection with what case, has not
      yet been determined."

      Our own efforts to clarify this point have proved
      equally vain.

      If we gather all reports that seem to present some
      guarantee of reliability, and if we try to extract
      from them a coherent interpretation, we have to divide
      the alleged occupants into two groups. On one hand, we
      find descriptions of men (more than fifty have been
      described in about twenty cases) similar to us in
      height and behavior; on the other hand, many accounts
      speak of "dwarfs" measuring between three and four
      feet in height...


Seems like that jury has been out a long time...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                       Re: 'Little Green Men' - Benson

From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 19:39:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 07:47:36 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men' - Benson


 >From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'
 >Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 21:03:51 +0100

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:27:54 EST
 >>Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>This was a question that we researched carefully, back about a
 >>decade ago. Around the turn of the century (the last one, not
 >>the most recent), there was a comic strip know as The Yellow
 >>Kid, which was printed in yellow ink. It was wildly popular and
 >>newspaper editors kept tempting the writer with bigger pay
 >>checks and more perks so that he jumped from one newspaper to
 >>the next (and hence the term Yellow Journalism). To combat this,
 >>one editor created The Green Man, which was printed in green ink
 >>and dealt with a man from another world. Hence the idea that
 >>people not of Earth were green.

 >As one of Martin Kottmeyer's helpers during his investigation
 >into the origins of LGM I am very much interested in your
 >reference.

 >Can you point us to any illustration?
 >Preferably on the Web?

List,

I can cite one old source in my library regarding LGM: 'Little
Gentleman In Green, A Fairy Tale' by Una Savin (Loring,
Publisher, Boston, 1865).

Tom Benson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                     Translators Still Needed - 01-07-02

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 22:49:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 07:53:53 -0500
Subject: Translators Still Needed - 01-07-02


Hello All,

Volunteers are _still_ needed to translate several short
paragraphs into as many languages as possible. Results will be
posted for use by international respondents.

I now have translations in five (5) languages covered and
translator's names and organizations are next to the languages
below. I thank them for their speedy response to my request and
for their generous offer of their time and assistance.

I will continue to post the list to UFO UpDates until enough
commitments to perform translations into the many different
languages listed have been secured.

I know that we have Portuguese, Italian, Finnish, Hebrew and
Swedish speaking members on this List. I would really appreciate
hearing from you. The only thing holding us up at the moment is
securing these translations. If you can dedicate a small amount
of time to this project it would be greatly appreciated.

I have added two names to the List below, Boris Shurinov who
will be handling the Russian translation and Luis Gonzales who
will perform the Spanish translation. My thanks to these
gentlemen for their kind offer of assistance.

Translators, still needed, please, for the following:

Arabic     [All]
Balkan     [All]
Chinese    [All]
Danish
Dutch      Frits Westra -- Editor UFO-Niewsbrief
Finnish
Flemish
French     Gilles Milot, Quebec Association of Ufology
German     Alfred Lehmberg
Greek
Korean
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Norwegian
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian    Boris Shurinov
Slavic     [All]
Spanish    Luis Gonzales
Swedish
Turkish
Ukranian
Vietnamese

the major African tongues and any other not listed above.
As you can see, we still have a long way to go.

If you can help, please contact me, privately, via:

john@virtuallystrange.net

Volunteers are asked to keep the content of the translations
private until formal, world-wide, public announcements are
made.

Your assistance is appreciated.


Regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 21:57:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:01:30 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Fleming


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete]
 >Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 12:05:57 -0600

 >Additionally, it may be possible to infer that something
 >untoward occurred at Roswell as a result of no report at all.
 >The smart money is on the fact that something (of some peculiar
 >classification) occurred there, but there is no mention of it at
 >all in Ruppelt's 'Report on UFOs'. I'd suggest that Ruppelt was
 >warned off the subject of Roswell when he was debriefed upon
 >leaving the service. The absence of any reference to Roswell in
 >his book when it filled the headlines of the time is significant
 >_because_ of that absence.


Sort of like Sherlock Holmes' "dog that didn't bark." I've had
thoughts along the same lines about all the Roswell base
personnel who say they knew absolutely nothing. They seem to
have known so little that they weren't even familiar with the
stories in the Roswell Daily Record at the time of the incident.
I don't think any of them were ever asked about what their
reactions were to the newspaper reports. But it's strange none
of them mentioned them voluntarily, if only to say how everyone
got a good laugh out of them. Did everyone there turn directly
to the sports section without checking what was on page one?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                     SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It'

From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 01:42:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:16:51 -0500
Subject: SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It'


Montana has a problem, and if you travel through Montana and spot
a herd of cattle, you'd be best advised to not slow down or stop
to let the kids get a closer look because some Cattle rancher
might shoot you. You see, the cattle ranchers in Montana are
nervous. And rightly so. That area of the world has been having a
rash of cattle mutilations that nobody can seem to _stop_ - _or_
explain. In the years from 1974 to 1977, the Great Falls area of
Montana was the location of the most intense and sustained wave
of animal mutilations in recorded history and with eight
reported cases during the summer of 2001, the residents are
getting worried that it's starting up again.

Some people believe that cattle mutilations are the work of some
alien race doing experiments here on Earth and some people
believe that these animal mutilations are the work of some
mis-guided individuals or groups.except for a few minor little
problems. Firstly, the animals are usually ex-sanguinated, that
means they have had their all their blood removed. Secondly, the
animals have complete areas of their bodies removed with such
surgical precision that medical doctors have a difficult time to
explain not only _how_ it could be accomplished outside of a
fully stocked operating theater but what instruments could have
been used.

The main problem that the cattle ranchers have with these animal
mutilations is that it seems that nobody really cares. When they
discover that one of the animals of their herd has been
mutilated like this, they call the local authorities to report
it but end up getting frustrated because there really isn't much
the Sheriff or Police can do about it. The government refuses to
launch a major investigation into it probably because if they
did, they'd have to admit that the cases across the world have
some kind of common link and _then_ where would we be?

However, there _does_ seem to be a little ray of hope out there
in the guise of the National Institute of Discovery Science -
NIDS. Back in June of this past summer, they received a call
from local police in Dupuyer, Montana regarding a 6 year-old Red
Angus that had been found dead and mutilated. The animal was
lying on its right side, with the left eye and eyelid missing,
hide from the left jaw was missing and parts of its tongue. Also
missing were the animal's vagina and rectum. There were no signs
of a struggle nor were there any tracks around the animal. But
the most interesting part of this is that when the NIDS
researchers did some cutting of the tissue away from the
mutilated jaw area, they found greenish coloured tissue mass
that contrasted with the pinkish skin in the area. They
immediately decapitated the animal, froze the head to prevent
decomposition and shipped it to their labs for further
investigation.

NIDS conducted a bit of an autopsy and additionally subjected a
lot of samples they collected to various testing. To insure that
they would have some kind of benchmark to judge from, NIDS
obtained an animal from a slaughterhouse and allowed it to
decompose for 4 days. They discovered a chemical compound called
'Oxindale' in the mutilated animal but not in the one from the
slaughterhouse, which led them to believe that the compound had
somehow been administered to the mutilated animal. Incidentally,
Oxindale has been shown to cause profound sedation, decrease in
blood pressure, decrease in muscular tone and loss of
consciousness in rats, dogs and humans. NIDS intends on
conducting more investigations on mutilated animals provided
they can receive the animals in a timely manner. This past
summer in Montana saw 8 cases reported but _this_ was the first
case for NIDS that wasn't too old to do a proper scientific
investigation.

Montana has a problem with Cattle mutilations and it may involve
aliens or not, but with groups like NIDS doing the _hard_
research and developing the data we're getting _closer_ to
determining what is behind animal mutilations.

But that's just _my_ take on it.....


www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/team/davef.html

Dave Furlotte is a weekly columnist on 'Strange Days... Indeed'
broacast by CFRB 1010 in Toronto and on the Web - Saturdays,
22:00 Eastern.

www.cfrb.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                              CE3 Producer Dies

From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:03:12 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:22:01 -0500
Subject: CE3 Producer Dies


EBK and List,


 From the Melbourne 'Herald Sun'

4th Jan 2002
page 25


***

Oscar Winner Takes Final Bow

Tough-talking movie producer Julia Phillips, the first woman to
win a best-picture Oscar, has died of cancer.

Phillips, 57, produced Oscar-winner 'The Sting' as well as 'Taxi
Driver' and 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' in the 1970s,
before succumbing to a raging cocaine habit.

She won Hollywood's attention again in 1991 with the bestselling
juicy memoir 'You'll Never Eat Lunch In This Town Again', which
invoked the names of such luminaries as Steven Spielberg, Warren
Beatty and Martin Scorsese.

Phillips, described as a brilliant but intimidating raconteur
who swore like a stevedore and smoked non-stop, was not worried
about burning her bridges with the books.

"She always said, 'It turned me from an old producer into an
icon'," her son-in-law, Modi Wiczyk, was quoted as saying.

She died on Monday in her Hollywood home, according to Daily
Variety. She is survived by children Kate and Matthew.


***

Phillips, who was diagnosed with the disease in August, died at
home Tuesday, 1st Jan 2002.


Regards,

John. W. Auchettl
Director - PRA


WEB: http://members.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/Pra1.htm

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
Australian & Asia UFO
1961-2002 - 41 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                       Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines

From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:25:04 -0500
Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines


EBK and List,


 From 'The Australian'

5th Jan 2002
page 6

***

'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'

By Paul Toohey

A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

The Australian branch of the Raelian Movement, which claims
55,000 members world-wide, said it wanted to support Aborigines
by initiating compensation claims for crimes committed and
admitted by the Catholic Church.

Australia Raelian leader Peter Heaven said the Pope's November
apology to the stolen generations was an admission of guilt
which left the church open to legal action.

Raelians believe governments, including the Vatican, can be sued
using an international court in Belgium.

The Raelian Movement will fund a legal team as well as expenses
for Aborigines to fly to Belgium to file their complaint, Mr
Heaven said.

Raelians are led by Rael, said to be a former French journalist.
A local spokesperson said Raelianism was a scientific religion
that believed all life on earth was deliberately created
scientifically by scientists and artists using DNA manipulation.

Human-like creatures from the sky, called the Elohim, colonised
Earth with creatures created by their own image.

Raelians support genetically modified food so the world can be
fed, human cloning because it is a step towards eternal life,
and eugenics - or improving the quality of offspring -- so
humans can be created without race or religion.

Rael is ambassador for the Elohim's Earth-based embassy. It was
established in 1973 after Rael was visited by a short, humorous,
almond-eyed creature who requested he set up a neutral zone by
which the Elohim could communicate with Earth's leaders. So far,
the creature hasn't come back.

Mr Heaven, who describes himself as Raelian spokesman to the
Aboriginal People, promised the world's TV networks would fly to
Australia to hear the Aboriginal case once complaints were filed
in Belgium.

The reaction among Aborigines contacted by The Weekend
Australian yesterday was mainly: "May we get back to you on
this?"

***


Regards,

John. W. Auchettl
Director - PRA


WEB: http://members.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/Pra1.htm

Phenomena Research Australia [PRA]
P.O. Box 523, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia, 3170
Australian & Asia UFO
1961-2002 - 41 YEARS OF RESEARCH SERVICE







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                        UFO Sightings Up In Malaysia

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:57:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 08:57:36 -0500
Subject: UFO Sightings Up In Malaysia

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/1/7/nation/ccufo&sec=nation


Monday, January 7, 2002

UFO Sightings Peaked Last Year

by Clarence Chua

PETALING JAYA: Against the backdrop of political upheavals and
an economic slump in the country, there were smiles among a
group of extra terrestrial watchers here who claimed there had
been an increase in UFO sightings last year.

The Centre for Malaysian UFO Studies (Cenmyufos), which looks
into reports concerning 'unidentified flying objects' said there
was also a reported case of alien abduction near Tambunan,
Sabah, early last year.

Ufologist Ahmad Jamaludin, the centre's co-ordinator, said there
had been six UFO sightings last year compared to only three in
2000. Three of the sightings were reported in Sabah, two in
Kedah while the other was in Penang.

He said the most sensational UFO encounter was reported in
February when a man living near Tambunan claimed that he met a
square-headed alien who wanted to take him away.

The man later went missing for 11 days.

This could be the first reported UFO abduction in Malaysia.

"Although the 11-day period was a little odd (as most UFO
abduction victims usually go missing for two to three hours or
up to five days only), the fact that there were some UFO
activities around Kota Kinabalu at that time could lend some
credence to the claim," said Ahmad.

Reports from the Sabah capital mentioned of a saucer-shaped UFO,
with flickering lights, being sighted before it disappeared
behind a hill.

In another sighting, purportedly videotaped by a man living
there, a bluish UFO flying in the night skies was recorded.

Ahmad said that in May, several villagers in Kedah claimed they
saw a lighted object descending from the sky one night and
landing at their kampung in Baling.

"I investigated the case, interviewed several witnesses and
prepared a video clip on the UFO landing over Baling for an
upcoming television programme," he said.

Ahmad, who has been studying UFOs since 1978, said his research
on the phenomenon showed there was a close link between the UFO
sightings and Earth's seismic activity.

Explaining further, he said: "Gravitational forces emitted by
objects in space cause the Earth's fault lines to shake, causing
earthquakes and, at the same time, act as a guide for UFOs to
reach Earth.

"There is a cycle in UFO sightings. It will peak every 10
years," he said adding that the most recent cycle peaked last
year.

He expected only two to three sightings a year from this year
until the next wave peaks in 2009 (give or take a year).


[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 8

                    Strange Lights Over Billings Montana

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 09:11:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 09:11:02 -0500
Subject: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana

The Billings Gazette - Montana

Monday, January 7, 2001


Strange Lights Over West End

Gazette Staff

Unusual white lights were spotted hovering over the West End of
Billings Saturday at about 6 p.m. A Billings woman, who asked
that her name not be printed, said she and her husband were in
their pickup truck when they spotted a lighted, half-spherical
object hover about 1,000-feet above an area near 36th Street
West.

The object had one flashing light and hovered for about four
minutes.

"My husband knows airplanes and he said, 'Those aren't any
airplane lights.' As soon as he said that, it took off," she
said. "Within two seconds, we couldn't see it. It was that fast.
I don't know what to make of it."

A Billings man who spends most of his evening riding a bicycle
in the downtown area said he spotted the flying object, but
thought it was just a very fast aircraft.

No sightings were reported to the Billings Police Department,
Montana Highway Patrol or Yellowstone County Sheriff's
Department, various officers and dispatchers said. Calls to the
Billings Logan International Airport control tower went
unanswered Sunday evening. A meteorologist at the National
Weather Service said people should call the agency if they spot
anything unusual in the sky.

"We didn't see anything here," he said, "but we weren't looking,
either."


[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

              Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Parmentier

From: Francois Parmentier <parcol@club-internet.fr>
Date: Tue,  8 Jan 2002 15:34:28 +0100 (CET)
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 03:48:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Parmentier


 >From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
 >Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >EBK and List,

 > From 'The Australian'

 >5th Jan 2002
 >page 6

 >***

 >'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'

 >By Paul Toohey

 >A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
 >eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
 >Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

 >The Australian branch of the Raelian Movement, which claims
 >55,000 members world-wide, said it wanted to support Aborigines
 >by initiating compensation claims for crimes committed and
 >admitted by the Catholic Church.

<snip>

Dear List members,

I doubt very much that Claude Vorhillon, alias Rael, cares about
Aborigines or about the Pope. He finds those means to get
some international publicity.

As you may already know, there have been several investigations
led by French journalists of him and his organization which have
deprived them of any credibility. French ufologist all agree
that he is a dangerous person and are worriedthat he apparently
succeeds in spreading his views into the international ufologic
community.

Best regards.

Franois Parmentier










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

             Re: SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It' - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 09:49:27 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:22:27 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI-170-01-05-02 - 'My Take On It' - Mortellaro


 >From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: SDI - 01-05-02 'My Take On It'
 >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 01:42:10 -0500


 >Montana has a problem, and if you travel through Montana and spot
 >a herd of cattle, you'd be best advised to not slow down or stop
 >to let the kids get a closer look because some Cattle rancher
 >might shoot you. You see, the cattle ranchers in Montana are
 >nervous. And rightly so. That area of the world has been having a
 >rash of cattle mutilations that nobody can seem to _stop_ - _or_
 >explain. In the years from 1974 to 1977, the Great Falls area of
 >Montana was the location of the most intense and sustained wave
 >of animal mutilations in recorded history and with eight
 >reported cases during the summer of 2001, the residents are
 >getting worried that it's starting up again.

<snip>

 >Montana has a problem with Cattle mutilations and it may involve
 >aliens or not, but with groups like NIDS doing the _hard_
 >research and developing the data we're getting _closer_ to
 >determining what is behind animal mutilations.

 >But that's just _my_ take on it.....

Dear Furry, List and Errol,

There is no mystery over these cattle mutilations, Furry. We
at the Canal Street UFoolillogical Society have already not
only solved the mystery, but capitalized on it. Oxindale is the
most pleasant ingredient in Gripple which adds a nice flavor
as well as a pleasant 'after glow.' And it does not require the
services of a cigarette after use. We of the Gripple Plant Number
Two, as opposed to Number One, have sealed a deal with the
second most frequent visitor here on earth, the Paladians from
Mongo. They give us Oxindale, they give us the 'good parts'
of the cattle (which we use to process our products) and we
give them Gripple. They love it. Helps them 'fold space' better.

And since their planet is dry (similar to Arrakis), we satisfy a
need.

By the way, cattle 'good parts' and the little critters which
inhabit them are a prime processing ingredient in our famoso
fresh wines.

Ergo, mystery solved. Another scoop and you herd it here.

G.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

              Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 12:11:16 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:27:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - McCoy


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers - :>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:11 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana


Hello, all.

 >Source:

 >http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?section=local&display=content/loc
al/13ufo.inc

 >The Billings Gazette - Montana

 >Monday, January 7, 2001


 >Strange Lights Over West End

 >Gazette Staff

 >Unusual white lights were spotted hovering over the West End of
 >Billings Saturday at about 6 p.m. A Billings woman, who asked
 >that her name not be printed, said she and her husband were in
 >their pickup truck when they spotted a lighted, half-spherical
 >object hover about 1,000-feet above an area near 36th Street
 >West.

I've flown out of Billings and did a rather large amount of
Aerial Firefighting in the area due to the proximity of the Crow
Indian Reservation (good firecrew to work with) grasslands and
the Beartooth Mountians (Nasty country to fly a DC7 in ).

 >The object had one flashing light and hovered for about four
 >minutes.

 >"My husband knows airplanes and he said, 'Those aren't any
 >airplane lights.' As soon as he said that, it took off," she
 >said. "Within two seconds, we couldn't see it. It was that fast.
 >I don't know what to make of it."

 >A Billings man who spends most of his evening riding a bicycle
 >in the downtown area said he spotted the flying object, but
 >thought it was just a very fast aircraft.

The Original sighting took place approx 1 mile from downtown,
maybe a little less. if memeory serves. Most of Billings sets in
a valley the airport sets above the town roughly north and not
very far (less than 2 miles - I've walked it) from the edge of
the City.

 >No sightings were reported to the Billings Police Department,
 >Montana Highway Patrol or Yellowstone County Sheriff's
 >Department, various officers and dispatchers said. Calls to the
 >Billings Logan International Airport control tower went
 >unanswered Sunday evening. A meteorologist at the National
 >Weather Service said people should call the agency if they spot
 >anything unusual in the sky.

The tower may have been closed, many Airports (Billings may be
one now) don't operate the tower 24/7

 >"We didn't see anything here," he said, "but we weren't looking,
 >either."

The Weather Service and the control tower sit well above the
city as I recall, there is a good 300-500 ft elevation (more as
you go into the Yellowstone river valley) difference, they may
have been _above_ the 'whatsit' that these folks saw.

The terrain is rolling grassland and broad river valleys until
you get to the Mountians - Rockies, to be exact - I remember the
Beartooths and the lovely Hellroaring river well.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                  Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:30:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:30:01 -0500
Subject: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object

http://www.mycfnow.com/orlpn/news/stories/news-117686420020107-090141.html


Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object
Newspaper Ad Claims Object Can Explain Antigravity

Posted: 10:20 a.m. EST January 7, 2002
Updated: 11:35 a.m. EST January 7, 2002

Port St. John, Fla. - A Florida man wants $10 million for an
object that he says came from an UFO, Local 6 News reported.

James Hughes recently took out an advertisement in The Florida
Today newspaper for an object he said could hold the secret to
antigravity.

Hughes told Local 6 News reporter Donald Forbes that his friend
was in a New Jersey garbage dump 45 years ago when a
cigar-shaped UFO dumped the rock-looking piece. He said that his
friend gave him the object because he was a physicist.

Forbes reported that Hughes' phone has been ringing off the hook
since he placed the ad in the newspaper and he has had a $7.5
million offer.

Hughes said that he had the object tested at a university lab
and found that it contained unusual metal alloys.

If Hughes sells the object, he plans to use the money to help
airport security, according to the report.

---

[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                         Dead Lawyers Society, Or...

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 16:45:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:34:04 -0500
Subject: Dead Lawyers Society, Or...

The Measure of Karl Pflock.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to
deceive." - Sir Walter Raleigh.

Pending my notification of when my statement will be ready in
regard to the Case of the Purloined Tapes, I offer this latest
maneuver by Pflock which you may interpret as you wish. I know
how I interpret it.

Pflock repeated his threats of legal action in a letter to me
dated January 2, 2002, allegedly sent "on advice of counsel",
including the warning that any repetition of my statements
"...will result in commencement of appropriate proceedings
against you." A Cc: was indicated to C. Calvin Carstens, Esq. An
internet search for a lawyer by that name in the Albuquerque,
NM, area where Pflock lives turned up some very interesting and
amusing facts:

On December 6, 2001, almost a month before Pflock's letter was
written, Albuquerque-area attorney Clyde Calvin Carstens was
caught red-handed trying to smuggle 437 pounds of marijuana
across the border. After being released on bail from this drug
bust, he was found dead, an apparent suicide, on his property
where bundles of money and other evidence of wrongdoing was
found. Mr. Pflock must be taking advice from spirit counselors.


- Dick Hall

P.S. Meanwhile, Pflock is strongly locked into a version of
False Memory Syndrome whereby he keeps repeating untrue
statements about the circumstances surrounding the purloined
tapes incident. His memory will be refreshed shortly.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                          Secrecy News -- 01/08/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:20:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:40:18 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/08/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 3
January 8, 2002


**      ON CRIMINALIZING "LEAKS"
**      PERU DOCUMENTS DECLASSIFIED
**      GPS VULNERABILITY
**      NUCLEAR HISTORY NEWS


ON CRIMINALIZING "LEAKS"

A congressionally-mandated review of the need to enact new
penalties for the unauthorized disclosure of classified
information is now underway in the Department of Justice.

The most extensive argument to date in favor of criminalizing
such "leaks" was published recently in the National Security
Studies Quarterly (NSSQ).

Leaks of classified information can have "broad ramifications,
resulting in direct and serious damage to U.S. intelligence
effectiveness, national security, and foreign relations," writes
Michael Hurt, legislative director for Rep. John Hostettler
(R-IN), in the current issue of NSSQ.

Mr. Hurt aims to provide an assessment of the damage caused by
leaks that would justify new statutory penalties.He cites
patterns of Iraqi denial and deception, setbacks in the pursuit
of Osama Bin Ladin, and India's unanticipated nuclear weapons
tests, all of which he says were aggravated by unauthorized
disclosures of classified information.

He proceeds to endorse the anti-leak legislation sponsored by
Senator Richard Shelby (but vetoed in 2000 by President
Clinton).He also proposes some innovations of his own, such as
amending the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which makes
disclosure of covert intelligence agents a crime, to include
technical space collection systems in the definition of "covert
agents."

Because Mr. Hurt's paper is the most rigorous public statement
available in favor of criminalizing all leaks of classified
information, its defects are particularly noteworthy.

In nearly 40 pages of analysis, Mr. Hurt fails to comprehend the
essential flaw in the Shelby legislation:It would permit the
executive branch both to define the crime (by deciding
unilaterally what is "classified") and then to prosecute its
violation.This would be an extraordinary concentration of
executive branch power and an invitation to abuse.

Mr. Hurt uncritically repeats the false allegation that former
Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary gave a classified diagram of the
W-87 nuclear warhead to U.S. News and World Report.This story,
propagated by Rep. Curt Weldon, has been thoroughly refuted.(See
Secrecy & Government Bulletin, Issue No. 80).It never happened.

Mr. Hurt appears to believe that the deliberative process is
essentially ceremonial and that it should not be permitted to
interfere with the desired outcome.

Thus, "Once Congress receives the [pending] Ashcroft review [on
the need for new anti-leak penalties], Congress ought to
reintroduce the anti-leak provision as a separate, stand-alone
bill," he writes, as if the outcome of the Ashcroft review were
a foregone conclusion.Maybe it is.

Similarly, he says without a hint of irony, open hearings on the
matter should be held by all means."Let all legitimate opposing
arguments air, featuring witnesses who may wish to testify in
defense of reducing government secrecy, increasing government
accountability, protecting reporters' sources or other elements
to the opponents' arguments.... Then, Congress should pass a
tough anti-leak measure."

"Leaking National Security Secrets" by Michael Hurt appeared in
the Autumn 2001 issue of National Security Studies Quarterly,
published by Georgetown University.The article may be found
here:

http://www.georgetown.edu/sfs/programs/nssp/nssq/Hurt.pdf


PERU DOCUMENTS DECLASSIFIED

On December 27, the State Department released some 38
declassified documents that had been requested by the Congress
of Peru concerning U.S. Government relations with disgraced
Peruvian intelligence chief Vladimiro Montesinos.

The documents were made publicly available on January 7 here:

http://usembassy.state.gov/lima/wwwhclass.html


GPS VULNERABILITY

A long-delayed Department of Transportation study found that the
Global Positioning System satellite network is vulnerable to
jamming and other forms of disruption, and should therefore not
be used as the sole basis for aircraft navigation.

"Government security concerns delayed publication for many
months, but public demand, coupled with secretarial-level
interest, finally secured the study's release and gave it high
visibility," wrote Charlotte Adams recently in Defense Daily's
Avionics Magazine.

The report, entitled "Vulnerability Assessment of the
Transportation Infrastructure Relying on the Global Positioning
System," was released in September 2001.A copy is available
here:

http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/asat/gpstrans.pdf


NUCLEAR HISTORY NEWS

The family of physics pioneer Niels Bohr announced last week
that it will release all of the documents in its possession
concerning the celebrated but mysterious meeting between Bohr
and German physicist Werner Heisenberg in September 1941.See the
Bohr Archive announcement here:

http://www.nbi.dk/NBA/webpage.html

Historians and others have long debated the meaning of that
encounter, Heisenberg's role in the Nazi nuclear weapons
program, and Heisenberg's motivation for seeking out Bohr.See
"Details of Nazis' A-Bomb Program Surface" by James Glanz in the
January 7 New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/07/national/07ATOM.html

In a splendid bit of web magic, the American Institute of
Physics has posted a 1948 audio clip featuring the voice of
Albert Einstein explaining the equivalence of matter and
energy.See:

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/voice1.htm


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message:
  subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:saftergood@fas.org
voice:(202) 454-4691








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:43:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:43:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


 >Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 13:05:28 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Roswell Threads

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell 'Threads'
 >>Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:50:05 -0800

 >>Andrew,

 >>Thanks for your efforts to unravel the Fort Worth debris
 >>puzzle. I'm surprised that your measurements have not received
 >>any comments from the List but I have one question: How are you
 >>sure that your measurements using the carpet stripes are
 >>accurate?

 >>Could you explain?

 >>Ed

 >Ed,

 >The method I'm using I believe is very accurate. The key to
 >measuring the debris is to obtain the mesaurement of an item for
 >which there would be no doubt about it's dimension. I was able
 >to obtain this by identifying the type of heating radiator used
 >in Ramey's office using Neil's scans and three engineering
 >mechanical design sources. Once the radiator was identified, I
 >was able to obtain the sectional width of the radiator. Knowing
 >the sectional width, which is a solid measurement, the radiator
 >and the carpet stripes were modeled. As a cross check, I took a
 >measurement of the radiator height and it was within +2.7% of
 >the required design height for this type of radiator.

 >The proof in the pudding though was to measure a piece(s) of
 >debris for which I knew the measurements of. The debris items I
 >could identify with was the two stiffners which intersect each
 >other in the RameyDubose photo. Professor Moore provided me with
 >very precise measurements of the stiffners in millimeters. The
 >first set of sketches I forwarded to Neil was of the stiffner
 >located on the floor. I could not reconcile the dimensions of
 >that stiffner to any of Professor Moore's measurements. The
 >measured height of the stiffner was out by - 66% and the width
 >by -131% as compared to Professor Moore's dimensions. It appears
 >that this stiffner may not belong to the rawin target. I was
 >able to reconcile the height of the stiffner attached to the
 >panel with Professor Moor's measurement, but not the width of
 >the stiffner. The height of the stiffner was within 99% of
 >Professor Moore's measurement but the width was smaller by about
 >- 66% or 2/3rds. As well, the overall shape of the stiffner did
 >not look like what you would expect to see based on Professor
 >Moore's measurements.


Karl, EBK and List,

"I told them it was a balloon and a RAWIN (radar-wind) target. I
believed this because I had seen many of these before..." Irving
Newton pg. 162, in Karl's 'Roswell'

Karl also writes:"Despite the tremendous weight of evidence
supporting the earthly answer to Roswell, those who do not like
that answer keep plugging away, trying with some desperation to
do an end run around that evidence with their own "facts"born of
innocently wishful thinking."

Yes, we do keep plugging away, but we promise not to while we're
trying an end run.

There may be an earthly answer to Roswell, but Andrew's
measurements blow holes in Karl's RAWIN thesis. And what about
the other bits and pieces we all can clearly see scattered on
Ramey's carpet.

And why did Newton give false testimony about the debris being
from a RAWIN? It obviously is not from a RAWIN. If it's not a
RAWIN, then what is it? Maybe folks should take a fresh look at
the FW photos and decide for themselves whether our evidence is
'wishful thinking'.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                        Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 19:52:02 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:45:42 -0500
Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Rudiak


 >Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 21:57:15 -0600
 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda [Re-send - Complete]
 >>Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 12:05:57 -0600

 >>Additionally, it may be possible to infer that something
 >>untoward occurred at Roswell as a result of no report at all.
 >>The smart money is on the fact that something (of some peculiar
 >>classification) occurred there, but there is no mention of it at
 >>all in Ruppelt's 'Report on UFOs'. I'd suggest that Ruppelt was
 >>warned off the subject of Roswell when he was debriefed upon
 >>leaving the service. The absence of any reference to Roswell in
 >>his book when it filled the headlines of the time is significant
 >>_because_ of that absence.

 >Sort of like Sherlock Holmes' "dog that didn't bark." I've had
 >thoughts along the same lines about all the Roswell base
 >personnel who say they knew absolutely nothing. They seem to
 >have known so little that they weren't even familiar with the
 >stories in the Roswell Daily Record at the time of the incident.
 >I don't think any of them were ever asked about what their
 >reactions were to the newspaper reports. But it's strange none
 >of them mentioned them voluntarily, if only to say how everyone
 >got a good laugh out of them. Did everyone there turn directly
 >to the sports section without checking what was on page one?

Another 'dog that didn't bark' is the absence of military
reports that should have followed on the heels of the incident.
For half a day, phone lines into Roswell AAF, Fort Worth AAF,
and the Pentagon were jammed with phone calls from reporters and
news agencies demanding details. Gen. Vandenberg, acting AAF
chief of staff, was reported himself being disturbed from his
routine and going to the AAF public information office to
personally handle the crisis. Radios and newspapers were full of
the story. Anxiety amongst the public was reported over the
news. All this because of a supposed major screw-up amongst
senior intelligence and command staff at Roswell AAF.

I'm sure there would have been some sort of Pentagon probe
demanding explanations, and reports _would_ have been written.
But nary a report has ever been found.

Similarly, the debris shipped to Wright Field should have
generated a report of findings. The FBI telegram from Dallas
concerning Roswell stated that the AAF was going to inform the
Cincinnati FBI office of their findings regarding the shipment
to Wright Field. The GAO in 1994 went looking for this promised
FBI report, and couldn't find this either.

However, an obvious hoax disc was sent to Wright Field by the
FBI the following month, and this generated a detailed technical
report back to the FBI (including the use of the supposedly "top
secret" name Project Mogul). This incident is documented in FBI
files, but not the Roswell shipment and results to Wright Field.

There are all sorts of "dogs that didn't bark" in the Roswell
case, which has always been very suspicioius.

Extra Credit: In which Sherlock Holmes story did the 'dog that
didn't bark' appear?


David "Woof" 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                        New Mac Tonnies Story OnLine

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 17:27:16 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:47:27 -0500
Subject: New Mac Tonnies Story OnLine


My story 'Disintegration' is in the Jan./Feb. issue of the
online 'zine 'Alternate Realities'. It can be reached at:

http://www.alternaterealitieszine.com/SFS.htm


--Mac









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                 Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 01:09:21 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:49:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Hatch


 >From: Francois Parmentier <parcol@club-internet.fr>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:34:28 +0100 (CET)

 >>From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
 >>Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>EBK and List,

 >>From 'The Australian'

 >>5th Jan 2002
 >>page 6

 >>***

 >>'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'

 >>By Paul Toohey

 >>A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
 >>eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
 >>Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

<snip>

 >Dear List members,

 >I doubt very much that Claude Vorhillon, alias Rael, cares about
 >Aborigines or about the Pope. He finds those means to get
 >some international publicity.

 >As you may already know, there have been several investigations
 >led by French journalists of him and his organization which have
 >deprived them of any credibility. French ufologist all agree
 >that he is a dangerous person and are worriedthat he apparently
 >succeeds in spreading his views into the international ufologic
 >community.

 >Best regards.

 >Francois Parmentier


Hello Francois:

I'm sure nearly everyone on this List is well acquainted with
Rael, the Raeleans and their doings. I know all I need to know
about them.

One of them wanted me to add a link to _their_ website!

Needless to say, I did not respond.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

               Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 03:37:55 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:51:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Lehmberg


 >From: Francois Parmentier <parcol@club-internet.fr>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:34:28 +0100 (CET)

 >>From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
 >>Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>EBK and List,

 >>From 'The Australian'

 >>5th Jan 2002
 >>page 6

 >>***

 >>'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'

 >>By Paul Toohey

 >>A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
 >>eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
 >>Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

 >>The Australian branch of the Raelian Movement, which claims
 >>55,000 members world-wide, said it wanted to support Aborigines
 >>by initiating compensation claims for crimes committed and
 >>admitted by the Catholic Church.

 ><snip>

 >Dear List members,

 >I doubt very much that Claude Vorhillon, alias Rael, cares about
 >Aborigines or about the Pope. He finds those means to get
 >some international publicity.

 >As you may already know, there have been several investigations
 >led by French journalists of him and his organization which have
 >deprived them of any credibility. French ufologist all agree
 >that he is a dangerous person and are worriedthat he apparently
 >succeeds in spreading his views into the international ufologic
 >community.

 >Best regards.

 >Francois Parmentier


With all due respect, gentlemen... the Aborigines!?! I won't
defend any cult of crass personality, but it seems to me that
there are not a lot of organizations, of any stripe, queuing up
to do battle with one of the biggest closed institutions of them
all over the mere rights of individual human beings. I'm
reluctant to discourage the redress of a _much_ maligned people
coming effectively from no other quarter.

Mark my words, lassies and lads of the listo-logical... it is
the too casual treatment of the many by the few that is the
biggest hurdle to the resolution of any kind of substantive
disclosure, keeps seemingly ubiquitous extraterrestrials from
taking disclosure into their own hands, and delays an all but
inevitable transition of aggregate humanity from mewling infant
at the bottom of a gravity well to cosmic adolescent on the fast
track to Type II civilization-hood. Yea and verily!

Claude Vorhillon may _be_ dangerous, but Aborigines flirt with
an imposed extinction. The Aborigines bang solidly down on the
base of the cosmic balancing device. Evenhandedness _must_ be a
universally respected quality! Evenhandedness must be the
propellant and mortar for spiritual elevation and social
advancement. Evenhandedness must surely attract the potential
extraterrestrial... and even if there's no extraterrestrial
humanity must be better for it.

So, if not him, who.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

                 Re: Dead Lawyers Society, Or... - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 05:51:43 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 06:59:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Dead Lawyers Society, Or... - Lehmberg


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Dead Lawyers Society, Or...
 >Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 16:45:35 +0000

 >The Measure of Karl Pflock.

 >"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to
 >deceive." - Sir Walter Raleigh.

 >Pending my notification of when my statement will be ready in
 >regard to the Case of the Purloined Tapes, I offer this latest
 >maneuver by Pflock which you may interpret as you wish. I know
 >how I interpret it.

 >Pflock repeated his threats of legal action in a letter to me
 >dated January 2, 2002, allegedly sent "on advice of counsel",
 >including the warning that any repetition of my statements
 >"...will result in commencement of appropriate proceedings
 >against you." A Cc: was indicated to C. Calvin Carstens, Esq. An
 >internet search for a lawyer by that name in the Albuquerque,
 >NM, area where Pflock lives turned up some very interesting and
 >amusing facts:

 >On December 6, 2001, almost a month before Pflock's letter was
 >written, Albuquerque-area attorney Clyde Calvin Carstens was
 >caught red-handed trying to smuggle 437 pounds of marijuana
 >across the border. After being released on bail from this drug
 >bust, he was found dead, an apparent suicide, on his property
 >where bundles of money and other evidence of wrongdoing was
 >found. Mr. Pflock must be taking advice from spirit counselors.

 >- Dick Hall

 >P.S. Meanwhile, Pflock is strongly locked into a version of
 >False Memory Syndrome whereby he keeps repeating untrue
 >statements about the circumstances surrounding the purloined
 >tapes incident. His memory will be refreshed shortly.

It's wrongly thought by some who 'scream' that Richard Hall
won't fight it seems. I think it apt or more than fine Hall
shove it where the sun won't shine, deep inside Karl's
indiscretion, betwixt 'convenient' recollections, turning over
mossy rocks that hide odd facts on Mister Pflock.

We see this bunky whine and such, but flatly Pflock protests too
much... evoking specious stoner lawyers? ...Injun Joe cons
Thomas Sawyer? Tempests in a teapot brewing more than he should
bite for chewing? Pflock won't like the end of this, or I
misread and am remiss...


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 9

             Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 06:14:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 08:40:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana - Meiners


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers - :>
 >Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:11 AM
 >Subject: Strange Lights Over Billings Montana

<snip>

 >No sightings were reported to the Billings Police Department,
 >Montana Highway Patrol or Yellowstone County Sheriff's
 >Department, various officers and dispatchers said. Calls to the
 >Billings Logan International Airport control tower went
 >unanswered Sunday evening. A meteorologist at the National
 >Weather Service said people should call the agency if they spot
 >anything unusual in the sky.


This seems to be the main attitude in Montana. Why report it? You
are branded by the media and actually very little gets done anyway.
Now, I wonder, with the sighting, if any further animal mutilations
took place.

Jean









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

              Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 10:36:06 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 02:40:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Mortellaro


 >Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 01:09:21 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines


 >>From: Francois Parmentier <parcol@club-internet.fr>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:34:28 +0100 (CET)

 >>>From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
 >>>Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>EBK and List,

 >>>From 'The Australian'

 >>>5th Jan 2002
 >>>page 6


 >>>'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'

 >>>By Paul Toohey

 >>>A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
 >>>eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
 >>>Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

 ><snip>

 >>Dear List members,

 >>I doubt very much that Claude Vorhillon, alias Rael, cares about
 >>Aborigines or about the Pope. He finds those means to get
 >>some international publicity.

 >>As you may already know, there have been several investigations
 >>led by French journalists of him and his organization which have
 >>deprived them of any credibility. French ufologist all agree
 >>that he is a dangerous person and are worriedthat he apparently
 >>succeeds in spreading his views into the international ufologic
 >>community.

 >>Best regards.

 >>Francois Parmentier


 >Hello Francois:

 >I'm sure nearly everyone on this List is well acquainted with
 >Rael, the Raeleans and their doings. I know all I need to know
 >about them.

 >One of them wanted me to add a link to _their_ website!

 >Needless to say, I did not respond.


Dear Larry, List, Errol,

I used to know a Madamoiselle Parmentier... I am certain
there is no relation....

According to an article on the Rense site, Vatican Astronomer
(boy that _does_ sound strange in light of my church's history),
Coyle, a Jesuit, say the universe must have life, that to think
of this vast universe in terms of 'just us,' is ludicrous. Which
is a speed used on many UFO's.

When it comes to railing Rael's, the church is likely not
interested. Neither am I. In fact, anything which resembles a
cult, even just resembles one, is anathema. There is nothing
worse than extremism, even if it is extremeism in the name of
God. Who, if I were He, would likely wind up smashed every night
and every day. Who the hell could take us after all the work
done to make us? No one in his right mind.

Extremism takes many turns in life. But the worst type is the
extremist who believes that he is right in spite of everything;
all evidence, all argument and all logic. For the extremist is
not logical, the extremist is emotional. No thought, no sense,
common or otherwise. How a man or woman can beat himself into
that kind of frenzy is beyond my ken. Yet it is here among us.
On this list. In our lives. And in our nightmares. "Let freedom
ring" is a phrase many Americans use. The world should use
something similar. "Let reason ring."

Nah!

So, Rael and Rail, unreal and real, respectively. And may the
Schwartz be with us.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

               Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 12:38:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 02:43:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object -



 >Source: WKMG TV - Orlando, Florida

 >http://www.mycfnow.com/orlpn/news/stories/news-117686420020107-090141.html


 >Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object
 >Newspaper Ad Claims Object Can Explain Antigravity

 >Posted: 10:20 a.m. EST January 7, 2002
 >Updated: 11:35 a.m. EST January 7, 2002

 >Port St. John, Fla. - A Florida man wants $10 million for an
 >object that he says came from an UFO, Local 6 News reported.

 >James Hughes recently took out an advertisement in The Florida
 >Today newspaper for an object he said could hold the secret to
 >antigravity.

 >Hughes told Local 6 News reporter Donald Forbes that his friend
 >was in a New Jersey garbage dump 45 years ago when a
 >cigar-shaped UFO dumped the rock-looking piece. He said that his
 >friend gave him the object because he was a physicist.

<snip>

<LOL>

It's nice to know that UFOs do not use the _whole_ earth as a
garbage dump, only the places which we humans have designated as
garbage dumps. If the aliens were dumping it, could it be that
it no longer worked and was garbage? Or may be aliens eat rocks
and this rock was too old to eat so they dumped it......

That guy better take the 7.5 million offer while its still hot
(if it is hot).








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 2

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 20:58:31 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 02:54:07 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 2


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 7, Number 2
January 8, 2002
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

RECTANGULAR UFO FLIES OVER AMMAN IN JORDAN

On Monday, December 31, 2001, at 8 p.m., a rectangular UFO flew
over Amman, the capital of Jordan, and was seen by hundreds of
residents.

The UFO, described as "a self-luminous rectangular object,"
first appeared over the Jorm district of the city. It flew in a
southwesterly direction across Ameena Bint Wahab Street and over
the top of the Jebel al-Hussein (hill). After passing over the
Jebel al-Weibdeh (hill), the UFO "emitted a bright flashing
light."

As it flew over the Weibdeh section or west end of the city, the
UFO was seen by hundreds of residents. Many Jordanians voiced
the opinion that the object was "a satellite," while others
claimed it was "an alien starship."

The UFO was also seen by residents of the Shmeisani section.
Police stations at Abdali and Wadi Abdoun were flooded with
telephone calls reporting the UFO's flyover.

A spokesman for the Royal Jordanian Air Force was quoted as
saying the light may have been caused "by a laser or a firework
launched to celebrate the New Year."

According to ufologist Abu Zidallah, Jordanian UFO groups are
very much excited by the sighting in Amman and plan to talk to
witnesses. (See the Jordanian newspaper Al-Dastur and Agence
France Presse for January 1, 2002.

Many thanks to Ayesha al-Khatabi for forwarding this story.)

(Editor's Note: Two millenia ago, Amman was known as
Philadelphia to the Romans. Yes, that's the same Philadelphia
that's in Acts of the Apostles. The Roman ruins are in the east
end of the city and include the Amphitheatre, built by Emperor
Antoninus Pius in 150 A.D., the Odeon, the Forum and the Temple
of Hercules.)


CATTLE MUTILATIONS SURGE IN NORTHERN MONTANA

This is the kind of deja vu Everett King could do without.

About 15 years ago, he discovered the grisly remains of one of
his cattle that had died mysteriously.

In October (2001), it happened again.

King said it looked as though a surgeon had sliced into his
seven-year-old Charolais, the way its right eye and right ear
were cut off--not to mention the way its reproductive organs
had been cored.

What King finds most unusual, however, is that two months
later, the carcass lies right where he found it, untouched.

"Predators won't eat it,' said King, who ranches outside
Valier (Montana), south of Lake Frances. 'It should have been
cleared up and gone a long time ago."

Ranchers in Pondera County, northwest of Great Falls,
reported four mutilations between June and August (2001).
Since then, there have been 11 more, and investigators are
still searching for answers.

The same bizarre circumstances haunted area ranchers and
baffled law enforcement twenty years ago, sparking rumors about
UFOs, cults and government conspiracies.

The mutilations went away in the 1990s but began again this
summer.

The most recent victim--a 12-year-old Hereford--turned up
earlier this month on a ranch north of Conrad," (population
2,900).

"'They skinned off the belly from her front legs to her back
legs all the way around,' Pondera County Sheriff's Deputy Dan
Campbell said, 'The complete bag (udder) was removed.'"

The last three mutilations occurred within three miles (5
kilometers) of each other in the Dry Forks area, about 10 to 15
miles (16 to 21 kilometers) west of Conrad.

In October (2001) members of the New Miami Colony, 18 miles
(26 kilometers) west of Conrad, discovered two mutilated cows
at the same time, 30 yards (27 meters) apart.

The scenes were remarkably similar to mutilations researchers
reported more than a decade ago, Campbell said.

Most of the cows had the skin scraped off their faces. Often,
the tongue, one eye and all or part of an ear had been removed.
Part of the udder was usually cut off, as well as the genitals.
And in most cases, the anus had been cored.

A majority of the cows were four or five (years old); one was
missing its teeth.

In the late 1970s, a high wave of alleged mutilations in the
southwestern states (of the USA) prompted a federally-funded
investigation. The resulting 300-page report concluded that
animal predators were responsible.

Although some describe the Pondera County (cattle) deaths as a
hoax or chalk them up to natural causes and predators, Campbell
and fellow investigator, Sheriff's Deputy Dick Dailey, say they
aren't convinced."

Cuts on the cows are often circular or oval, and--as with
King's Charolais--seem to be made with surgical precision.

The animals seem to bloat faster than normal, and the missing
hide doesn't reflect the work of predators, Campbell said.

"I've never seen an animal cut just the face off a cow when
there's lots of other stuff they go after," he said.

One mutilated cow looked like it had been burned. Another seemed
to have bruises around its neck as though it had been strangled.
One had a long cut with a perfectly-ridged edge, as though the
hide had been sliced with a tool similar to pinking shears.

"Also strange is that in most cases, no tracks or footprints
were detected around the animals' bodies, even in mud or snow."

A misconception is that the cows had been drained of blood.
Natural coagulation makes it look the creatures' fluids had
been drained, Dailey said.

Dailey, who lives in Dupuyer (Montana), spent several nights
this fall camped out in dark fields, trying to catch the
culprit in the act. He has reviewed all the facts and checked
out dozens of Web sites looking for answers.

Still, nothing.

"I've read everything I can read on it, and I really don't
know what in the heck it is," he said.

Ranchers aren't sure what to think, either.

In September (2001) Jim VandenBos discovered the body of one
of his $850 two-year-old Angus (cattle) lying dead in his
pasture.

"The right side of its face was skinned, and the exposed
jawbone was so smooth, it looked like it had been polished,
VandenBos said."

Its tongue was cut off along with its right ear, eye and
reproductive organs. A tennis-ball-sized patch of skin on its
shoulder was hard like plastic.

Again, coyotes--even other cattle--steered clear.

VandenBos has been ranching southwest of Valier (population
500) for more than 30 years and remembers the last wave of
mutilations well.

"It's kind of a spooky thing," he said, "I haven't worried
about it too much because it's something I can't control...but
I'd like to find an explanation."

Toward the end of October (2001), a neighbor found the
750-pound steer that died at Glen and Ruby Bouma's dry creek
bed, three miles (5 kilometers) west of Conrad.

"There was a little tail of grass pushed up like it was shoved
up underneath it," Ruby Bouma said.

The hide was missing from the calf's stomach and its
reproductive organs were gone, but there were no tracks, no
bullet holes and no claw marks.

The calf, No. 95, was about a year old and worth $600. It was
one of the friendliest animals the Boumas owned.

A local vet said it died of dust pneumonia, but Glen and Ruby
have their doubts.

"That's possible because it's so dry,' Ruby Bouma said, 'But I
think we would have known if it was sick. We took special
notice because it was one of two calves that are like pets to
us. It would come up and smell your hand or your pant leg."

The whole thing is peculiar, if you ask the Boumas. When a cow
dies of natural causes, for instance, predators will usually
chew into its flesh.

Glen and Ruby's calf was missing only its hide. And when they
checked on Thanksgiving Day (November 22, 2001), predators were
still keeping their distance.

Some folks in the area think the U.S. Air Force or aliens are
behind the mutilations but not Ruby.

"I'm sorry, but I personally think it's somebody
local...they're doing it for kicks," she said.

One difficulty lead investigators have encountered in cracking
the case is gathering evidence.

After two or three days, collecting evidence becomes a lost
cause because the cattle are so badly decomposed. And in the
summer, carcasses rot faster and often go undiscovered for
weeks.

Pondera County deputies also hope a Nevada laboratory will
answer some of their questions.

This fall, Campbell and Dailey chopped the head off a
mutilated cow, packedit in dry ice and shipped it to the
National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) in Las Vegas,
Nevada.

The privately-funded institute pays scientists and retired
police officers to investigate bizarre phenomena including
mutilations and UFO sightings. A spokesman for the institute
said researchers are nearly finished with their study and will
send a copy of the report to the Pondera County Sheriff's
Office in a couple of weeks.

Conrad is located just west of Interstate Highway I-15,
approximately 58 miles (97 kilometers) northwest of Great
Falls, Montana. (See the Great Falls, Montana Tribune for
January 3, 2002, "Cattle mutilations back--Ranchers, lawmen
baffled by crime wave" by Katie Oyan, page one. Many thanks to
Louise A. Lowry for this news story)


LARGE TRIANGULAR UFOs RETURN TO BELGIUM

A new wave of "Flying Triangles," large triangular UFOs "as
large as buildings," has been reported in Belgium.

The current flap is similar to the mass sightings of "Flying
Triangles" over Brussels, Ghent, Antwerp and Tournai back in
1990.

Eyewitnesses report seeing "blue lighting on the undersides of
the large crafts" plus yellow and orange lights.

In mid-December 2001, two men in their twenties "reported a
very close encounter with a silver, cylindrical-shaped UFO"
over the industrial city of Namur, located 45 kilometers (27
miles) southeast of Brussels.

"The triangles are reported having varying lengthy structures,
with red, blue and green lights, as well. The UFOs are orange
in color."

"Many Belgian ufologists believe the Flying Triangles are
U.S.-military-related" because of the nearby presence of the
Supreme Headquarters--Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Belgium.
(See the Belgian newspaper La Derniere Heure for

December 19, 2001. Many thanks to George A. Filer, editor of
Filer's Files, for letting UFO Roundup use this news story.)


AIRLINE PASSENGER SPOTS A UFO OVER MISSISSIPPI

Mississippi's UFO flap entered its second week with the
sighting of a mysterious object hovering motionless over the
northern part of the state, just below the state border with
Tennessee.

On Monday, December 31, 2001, at around 3 p.m., Karen A. was
seated in Row 8 on the left-hand side of an American Airlines
Super 80 jetliner when she decided to lift the shade on her
window. The jetliner had left Dallas,

Texas at 2 p.m. and was enroute to Washington D.C. when the
incident occurred.

"While enroute in flight, I decided to open my window (shade),"
Karen reported. "Normally I do not like to look out plane
windows, as I am not fond of flying. But we were above the
clouds and it was sunny."

"To the east, I noticed a white circle above the clouds. At
first I wondered how a seagull could reach the same height
(altitude) we were traveling at 30,000 feet (9,000 meters). It
was a few thousand feet lower than my plane. Then I thought,
Well, that is silly. It was a round white object, not a bird,
and it was not moving. Then it seemed to have somehow drifted
slowly east, till it was right in a direct line from my window.
It seemed to hover a little and drift a little further west of
my plane."

"At this point, I thought, Well, with my plane moving about 500
miles an hour, I must be seeing a weather balloon. No sooner
did I finish that thought than my 'weather balloon' then shot
up in a diagonal western movement, clear into the horizon, not
to be seen again."

Karen described the UFO as "white and perfectly round. Large
enough for me to see very clearly from where I sat in the
plane. I could not tell how far away it was from me, but it was
quite a distance. Then the object shot

off at light speed (in my opinion, faster than any supersonic
plane I have ever seen--K.A.)."

Karen is not exactly sure where the encounter took place. But
the time of her encounter and the jetliner's speed would have
put the Super 80 over northern Mississippi, perhaps near
Oxford, which is 100 miles (160 kilometers) north of Jackson,
the state capital. (Email Form Report)


CROWD OF TWENTY SPIES A UFO OVER QUEENS, N.Y.

On Sunday, December 30, 2001, at 12:30 a.m., Paulette C. and
"about twenty friends" were hanging out on a corner in the
borough of Queens in New York City, between Grand Central
Parkway and Woodhaven Boulevard, when they spied an unusual
light in the sky.

"We were looking up at the moon when all of a sudden we saw
stars or what we thought was a star, the biggest in the sky,
and they started to shoot in the sky," Paulette reported, "But
in all directions. They would stop and dart. Some would line up
and it would look like they were playing a game of
cat-and-mouse. It was like that for maybe three minutes."

"I even called people out that were in the restaurant on the
corner. My whole family saw these objects, and they're
wondering what it is." (Email Form Report)


TRIANGULAR UFO HOVERS OVER DOVER CASTLE IN UK

On Thursday, December 20, 2001, at 5 p.m., Kevin Olds of Dover,
Kent, UK "was on Albert Road, Dover when he saw three very
bright lights in a triangular formation at a height (altitude)
of approximately 200 to 300 feet (60 to 90 meters) coming from
the direction of Dover's Eastern Docks, heading in a northerly
direction."

Olds "first observed it over Dover Castle, a famous landmark,
and after a couple of seconds, it banked westward and headed
into his direction, getting lower. By this time, he could see a
dark triangular shape which the lights were attached to. The
object made no sound, and Olds 'felt it was going to crash'
when it 'disappeared behind a row of nearby homes and out of
view.' The entire incident lasted some 30 seconds." (Many
thanks to Chris Rolfe of UFO Monitors-East Kent for this
report.)


MYSTERIOUS LIGHT PLANE CRASHES SWEEP THE USA

Over the weekend, the USA was struck by three mysterious
airplane crashes, all of which took place on Saturday, January
5, 2002.

The most publicized incident was the case of Charles Bishop,
15, of Palm Harbor, Florida, who crashed a Cessna 172 into the
side of the Bank of America building in Tampa.

The "15-year-old student pilot took off in a small plane
without permission Saturday and crashed into a skyscraper after
ignoring a Coast Guard helicopter's signals to land,
authorities said."

"The crash occurred after Charles Bishop's grandmother brought
him to the National Aviation flight school for a 5 p.m. flying
lesson, said Marianne Pasha, a spokeswoman for the Pinellas
CountySheriff's Office."

"'The next thing the instructor know, he was gone,' Pasha
said."

Bishop reportedly "expressed sympathies for Osama Bin Laden but
said in a suicide note that he acted alone, authorities said
Sunday," January 6, 2002.

"'From this action, we can assume he was a troubled young man,'
Tampa police chief Bennie Holder said."

"Too young to fly solo, or even drive himself to flight school,
Bishop took off without permission just before 5 p.m. Saturday.
His brief flight across Tampa Bay took him over MacDill Air
Force Base, the home to the bunker-like U.S. Central Command
that directs all operations in Afghanistan and Central Asia."

"The base's air control tower asked a Coast Guard helicopter to
shadow the Cessna 172R. The helicopter was already in the air
on a standrd homeland security patrol when it intercepted the
plane. A crewmember motioned repeatedly for Bishop to land. But
Bishop ignored him as well as all attempts to contact him on
the radio."

"Meanwhile, the military's North American Aerospace Defense
Command (NORAD), which is responsible for defending domestic
airspace, ordered F-15 fighter jets to scramble from Homestead
Air Force Base south of Miami. By the time the jets reached
Tampa, Bishop had crashed into the 28th floor of the 42-story
Bank of America building."

The 15-year-old boy was killed instantly.

"The short, handwritten message Tampa police said they found in
the pocket of Charles Bishop, 15, also expressed support for
the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In the note, the high school
freshman said he acted alone, said Tampa Police Chief Bennie
Holder."

"'He was acting out his sympathy for Osama Bin Laden,' Holder
said Sunday. 'He expressed support for what happened on 9-11.'"

"But Andrea Panarelli, the ninth grader's honors English
teacher at East Lake High School in Palm Harbor, Florida, said
Bishop's fatal flight 'was totally out of the blue. None of the
students saw it coming. I didn't see it coming.'"

"In one class at East Lake, Bishop wrote movingly of his anger
and hurt over the lives lost in the attacks on the World Trade
Center. As a private school student last year, he proudly
carried the American flag and belted out the lyrics to the song
America."

"Yet there were reports that he told other students to watch
for him on the news, and the FBI has confiscated his computers.
He hinted of a Middle Eastern background to one teacher after
the terrorist attacks. Tampa police say they can't find Bishop's
father, who has been long absent, but that the man, Charles
Bishara, is believed to be of Syrian and Italian descent."

(Editor's Comment: Congratulations, Mr. Bishara, you just made
the Ten Most Wanted List for the supposed crimes of changing
your address and having ancestors from Italy and Syria. I
suppose Tom Ridge's next move will be to encircle the city of
North Providence, Rhode Island, where several thousand
residents are "of Syrian and Italian descent," with
20-foot-high razor wire and turn it into a big concentration
camp.)

Yet, the crash in Tampa wasn't the only strange incident
involving light planes over the weekend.

"A single-engine airplane crashed and exploded in the foothills
northwest of Boulder, Colorado," 26 miles (41 kilometers)
northwest of Denver, "killing the only person on board, a
sheriff's spokesman said Saturday afternoon."

"The plane went down on a hillside before 4 p.m., Boulder
County Sheriff's Supervisor Jay Willette said."

"The pilot's name was not immediately available."

"The site is inaccessible to vehicles, and rescuers had to walk
to the debris. The fire was out by the time the first rescuers
arrived, Willette said."

"He did not know where the flight originated or where it was
headed."

And in southern California, "a twin-engine plane crashed a
block away from an airport Saturday, killing at least one
person, authorities said."

"The Cessna 337 Skymaster crashed in a vacant lot in a
commercial and residential area" of Buena Park, California, 20
miles (32 kilometers) southeast of Los Angeles, "Orange County
Fire Authority Capt. Stephen Miller said."

"Miller did not know how many people were aboard the six-seat
plane."

"The pilot had been cleared to land just before 1 p.m. when air
traffic controllers saw it roll over and crash about a block
west of Fullerton Municipal Airport."

"The plane knocked down telephone lines, crashed into a wall
and exploded into flames, Miller said." (See the Duluth, Minn.
News-Tribune for January 6, 2002, "Small planes crashes into
Tampa building," page 4; the Chicago Tribune for January 7,
2002, "Boy's crash shows security has holes," page 1; USA Today
for January 7, 2002, "Copycat raises security questions," page
3A, and for January 8, 2002, "Family, friends struggle to find
reason for suicide crash," page 4A; and the Duluth, Minn.
News-Tribune for January 6, 2002, "One dead in plane crash" and
"Twin-engine plane crash kills two," page 2.)


 From the UFO Files...

1995: PHANTOM TRUCKERS ON THE PRAIRIE

Another unusual "phantom trucker" encounter took place in
December 1995 on the prairie in western North Dakota.

Kevin and Sharon H. left their home in Bismarck, the capital of
North Dakota, for a Christmas trip in late December 1995. They
were headed west on Interstate Highway I-94. "The
husband-and-wife duo was driving to visit

Sharon's family for a week-long Christmas vacation outing..
Little could they have realized that this simple cross-country
trip would turn into a life-or-death ordeal."

"Even though it was one of those on-again, off-again,
snow-filled Decembers, they thought they could handle the trip.
After all, they did have a four-wheel-drive vehicle with snow
tires."

"What started out as a light snow turned heavy. In less than
two hours, the snow and ice became so terrible that they had to
pull over to the shoulder of the highway" near Hebron, North
Dakota (population 700).

"'It's okay, honey,' said Kevin. 'The snow will be over soon.
Then we can start again.'"

"But the snow and ice just wouldn't stop."

"'It looks like it's never going to let up!' exclaimed Sharon."

"'Come on, Sharon. You know it will. As soon as it lightens up
a bit, we'll start driving again.'"

"They waited. And waited and waited. After to close to a
half-hour of constant (snow) bombardment, even Kevin began
getting worried."

"'We're going to be buried in here if we don't do something
fast!' cried Sharon."

"'Let's try to get back on the Interstate.'"

"Kevin started the engine and tried to get back onto the road."

"'We're stuck!' he exclaimed."

"Getting out of the car, Kevin tried his best to clear snow
from the wheels. But it was useless. The ice was unyielding.
Now their car was stuck. And if it kept on snowing like this,
they would soon be buried."

"Pulling out their cell phone, Kevin received nothing but
ear-crackling static. They knew they were in a terrible
situation."

"Immediately Kevin got out and retrieved his emergency
equipment from the trunk (boot in UK--J.T.). This gear
consisted of some orange (highway) cones, flares, an extremely
warm Air Force blanket, a first-aid kit and some canned food."

"Kevin began getting really worried. Not wanting to let his
wife see him panic, Kevin played it cool...as cool as he could
under such circumstances."

"Because he didn't want to wear down the car batteries, he now
began rationing the car's heat. It must have been ten (degrees)
below zero (Fahrenheit) outside, but at least they didn't have
the stabbing icy knives of wind to cut them."

"Eventually their hopes of being rescued began to fade. Sharon
suggested trying something they usually never did."

"'Let's pray,' she suggested."

"'What?'"

"'You know, pray.'"

"'I haven't prayed since I was a little kid in the first
grade,' said Kevin.

"'Well, it's probably time you started again,' answered his
wife."

"Kevin hesitated. He didn't think he could remember how. After
all, he was always an in-charge, take-charge kind of guy. He
had never thought he would have to ask God for anything."

"Realizing that they were in a very bad situation, he finally
agreed to pray as he clasped his frigid hand in his wife's."

"'Dear Lord, please, please send one of your angels to help
us,' they prayed."

Every passing minute seemed like an hour. Kevin lost all track
of time. In the darkness, he listened to the howl of the
relentless prairie wind as the snow piled up around their car.

"Then, Kevin opened his eyes with a start."

"'Did you hear that?' he asked anxiously."

"His wife opened her eyes and looked around."

"'It's still snowing. I can't see anything.'"

"'No! I think I hear a motor!'"

"Quickly getting out of the car, Kevin saw a large green tow
truck, complete with a large snow plow, slowly making its way
toward them through the falling snow."

It's the state highway department! he thought, We're saved!

"'Right here! Hey! Over here!'" he yelled, jumping out into the
middle of the road. In a moment, the truck came to a halt."

"Two large men got out of the truck. They were wearing white
parkas. The men's faces were obscured with green scarves with
dark slits for eye holes. Kevin didn't need to do much talking
because both men nodded and quickly got to work. Before long,
the car was able to get back onto the road."

"As they were ready to roll, Kevin turned back to thank the two
men. Both the men and their truck had disappeared."

Getting into the car, Kevin told his wife that "he couldn't see
them because of the bad weather conditions."

"But Sharon insisted that they had literally disappeared. 'I
saw them flash their lights at us as if to say goodbye,' she
remembers, 'Then, as I turned to look back, they were gone!'"

As the first glimmers of dawn appeared in the east, the couple
drove past a state highway department yard on their side of the
highway. A big tow truck, similar to the one they had seen, its
headlights ablaze, rolled out of the yard and started down the
interstate highway. Seeing lights on in the office, Kevin pulled
off the highway into the yard. He wanted to leave a thank-you
note for the heroic two-man crew that dug out his half-buried
vehicle.

Entering the office, Kevin saw a male dispatcher at the radio
console. "Hi," he said, "My car was stuck in snow a couple of
hours ago. Back there around Mile Marker 102. Couple of your
boys dug us out. I wanted to thank them."

The dispatcher gave him a strange look. "Mister," he said,
"What are you talking about? There's been nobody on the highway
all night. Why, the first plow just went out of here five
minutes ago!" (See Christmas Angels, Globe Mini-Mags, Boca
Raton, Florida, December 2001, "Angels in a Blizzard," page
38.)


Join us next week for more UFO and Fortean news from around the
planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO
Roundup." See you in seven days.


UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2002 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 UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine, plus
archives of Filer's Files, Oz Files, and UFO News 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                        NASA's Future Role In Space?

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 02:57:45 -0500
Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?


On December 27, James Oberg and Marcia Smith, writer of the
rumored President Carter UFO report, appeared together on
National Public Radio to discuss "What's Next in Space?" They
discussed the regular issues of the space station, returning to
the moon, and even the overplayed fund raiser of "perhaps we
will land men on Mars someday." A picture was presented, that
money was short, but NASA has many plans for the future in
space.

Some historical documents however, indicate that NASA may just
be just a dog and pony show, in the actual future space plans by
top US movers and shakers.

Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
1982 President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
people at the private White House screening.

Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.

The movie started at 8:22 p.m., and the President retired for
the night as soon as the movie was over. Now, the very next
event on Reagan's schedule was at 9:47 in the morning. It
occurred in the White House Situation Room where George W. Bush
and other top officials monitored the September 11th terrorist
attack. The room is described by the NSC as " a 24-hour watch
and alert center. Its mission is to provide the President, the
National Security Advisor and the members of the NSC staff with
current intelligence and open-source information in support of
the formulation and implementation of national security policy."

The Reagan briefing was described as "Briefing of the U.S. Space
Program Policy." In the daily schedule the briefing was
described as a briefing on the "U.S. Space Program." In
attendance for the briefing were Reagan, Bush, Reagan's Chief of
Staff and Deputy, National Security Advisor and three deputies,
a staff member of the National Security Council, and Reagan's
Science Advisor. The one group that was absent from the room was
NASA. Not a single representative from the space agency was
present. It makes one wonder.

Presenting the inside story of how the U.S. Presidents have
handled the UFO situation.


http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.com
Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Chalker

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:03:09 +1100
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:01:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Chalker


 >From: John. W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 07:04:50 EST
 ><ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines

 >From 'The Australian', 5th Jan 2002, page 6

 >'Raelians Offer A Flight To Justice'
 >By Paul Toohey

 >A Group of UFO enthusiasts who support human cloning and
 >eugenics has offered to pay the travel and legal costs of
 >Aborigines who might like to go to Belgium to sue the Pope.

 >The Australian branch of the Raelian Movement, which claims
 >55,000 members world-wide, said it wanted to support Aborigines
 >by initiating compensation claims for crimes committed and
 >admitted by the Catholic Church.

I suspect this will do little to add credibility to legitimate
aboriginal grievances. Only the best, well intentioned, on site,
real time and active programmes and activities will be
meaningful in the long term. Action now, not just tommorrow,
carried out through close cooperation, not mediated by hidden
agendas, seems to be what is needed. The Raelian "support" may
have its own agenda?

Recently I spent time with aborigines in researching and
investigating some potentially significant UFO claims. This
involved close cooperation between us and our aboriginal hosts
and guides in the near Outback. Without their cooperation
progress would have been difficult. The situation showed us
glimpses of the worst and best of the interface between black
and white cultures. It left me with strong positive feelings
that enhanced my existing affection for the aboriginal people
and their culture. But subtle and sometimes explicit acts of
discrimination or harrassment against these aborigines were
depressing to witness. I hope I see the day when these
communities can exist where such discrimination or harrassment
become absent or at least very unusual.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                      Lorraine Mafi-Williams Aboriginal

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:59:37 +1100
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:07:05 -0500
Subject: Lorraine Mafi-Williams Aboriginal


Lorraine Mafi-Williams aboriginal "contactee/abductee"
(1940-2001)

Lorraine Mafi-Williams once asked me to write her "shamanic
biography", but too many things intervened. I was sadden to
learn in July from Tweed Head aborigines that she had passed
away.

Aspects of her life have been recorded in diverse sources. She
has an entry in the Encyclopedia of Aboriginal Australia (1994)
Vol.2 pg. 641-642, which records her "stolen generation"
background and her contribution to media arts.

I found this undated piece in the local Byron Shire Echo
newspaper web site.

http://www.echo.net.au/

She died in February, 2001.


Aboriginal activist Lorraine Mafi Williams dies

"Eve Sinton Lorraine Mafi Williams, an Aboriginal activist often
at the centre of local controversy, died last Tuesday aged 60.
Ms Mafi Williams was the daughter of the Rev. Bob Turnbull, an
activist in the 30s and 40s, and her family was from the
Woodenbong area. She was born at the Purfleet Mission at
Kempsey. Like many of her generation, Lorraine Mafi Williams was
taken from her parents at a young age. During the 70s and 80s
she became part of a powerful activist group in Sydney. With her
cousin Mum Shirl and her niece Isabel Coe she was instrumental
in helping care for over 4,000 troubled children of many ethnic
backgrounds. She helped found the Black Theatre in Newtown that
started many people such as Eddie Mabo and Brian Brown in acting
and political careers. Ms Mafi Williams was a film maker and her
short film Eelemarni won the Erwin Rado Award For Best
Australian Film, Melbourne Film Festival, 1988. She was also a
writer and story-teller, and edited Spirit Song, the first
anthology of Aboriginal poetry, published by Omnibus Books in
1993. Ms Mafi Williams undertook a great deal of Aboriginal
women's business. Leavers Lake, a small tea-tree lake near
Suffolk Park, was of particular importance to her. Her
occupation of land at Suffolk Park, where she wanted to
establish a cultural sanctuary, was strongly opposed by the
Arakwal people. Her friend Bob Cummins said, "She was a
brilliant person, but Byron Bay turned on her and she was
reduced to the status of a charlatan by people ignorant of her
knowledge. These pressures contributed to her death." Ms Mafi
Williams had been seriously ill over the past three years,
suffering two heart attacks and being diagnosed with diabetes.
She had spent many months in and out of hospital, and died
peacefully in her sleep. Her funeral arrangements had not been
finalised as The Echo went to press."


I followed her career with interest from the late 1960s through
to the 1990s. I interviewed Lorraine back in 1996 and she also
wrote down her beliefs for me.

I referred to her in my own book "The OZ Files - the Australian
UFO Story" (1996), pgs 211-212:


Some aboriginal people are already coming forward to tell of
possible UFO or abduction related experiences. For example,
Lorraine Mafi-Williams, who has been described as a storyteller
and liaison officer for the spiritual truths of her Githebul
group from the Bundjalung tribe, has revealed to me some of her
perceptions of these intrusions into both aboriginal and western
lives.

Our attitude to what goes on up in the heavens is what rules
us Aboriginals. Its similar to religion, whereby Christians
believe in a religious world ruled by one God, but many Saints ,
we believe the same only the many saints to us are planetary
ones whom you in the the Western world refer to as ET or aliens.
We call them Wandjinas and Mimi Spirits, and have done so for
thousands of years, until 1788, when an English concept of the
above was interestingly enough (found to be) parralel to what we
have practised for eons; that we commonly refer to as our
Dreamtime, that began in the Milky Way.

Lorraine suggests that communications from these beings is
ongoing and cites her own experiences with her old friend since
the age of 12. She feels she is an abductee . ... my dear old
friend took me up, yes in a UFO, but a different sort to the
western beliefs.  Her experiences were more spiritually
orientated. She adds, I went through all or nearly what
abductees did ... "  Lorraine indicated, We believe in UFO, but
here to we have the aboriginal concept and belief, and we know
about abductions and why.

Lorraine has, over a number of decades, courageously tried to
act as a bridge between western and indigineous cultures, to
improve understanding between both. In doing so, she has
occassionally drew the ire and prejudices of both cultures."


I explore some of the wider issues in a seperate research
document:

http://www.project1947.com/forum/bcabor.htm

In an evocative book, 'Unconventional Means: The Dream Down
Under' (In Circle Press, 2000, see www.incirclepress.com) Anne
Richardson Williams takes a "spiritual journey" meeting with
Lorraine Mafi-Williams in Australia and recording some of her
aboriginal traditional stories and other sometimes eclectic
beliefs that reflect the bridging path Lorraine took. This book
is not a UFO book but rather a personal journey and refection on
the resonances of that journey. It is a story that resonates
well with Lorraine's own journey.

During 2001 I spent some time in research and just plain
exploring and experiencing on and around the striking Mt.
Warning, near Murwillumbah. While there for other reasons I
kept thinking about Lorraine during some of this time. At the
time I did not know she had passed away. The aboriginal name for
Mt. Warning is Wollumbin. Lorraine Mafi-Williams was an
aboriginal custodian for Wollumbin.

Lorraine Mafi-Williams: aboriginal activist & media identity,
writer & film maker, keeper of the stories, a "stolen
generation" survivor, self-claimed alien abductee, native
custodian of Wollumbin, spirit of place wandering (1940-2001).









   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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

               EW: Vatican Astronomer Admits Possibility Of ET

From: Kurt Jonach <eWarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 22:00:01 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:09:12 -0500
Subject: EW: Vatican Astronomer Admits Possibility Of ET



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

The Electric Warrior : News January 9, 2002
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews003A.htm

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

VATICAN ASTRONOMER ADMITS POSSIBILITY OF ET
UFO & ETI News

*** A Spanish newspaper reports comments by the director
of the Vatican Observatory regarding extraterrestrial
intelligence ***


From: Scott Corrales
Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU)
Source: El Mundo (newspaper-Spain)
Date: Monday, January 7,2002

EFE.- Jesuit George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory,
is convinced of the existence of extraterrestrial life and
states that it is "madness" to think than humans are alone in
the universe.

Father Coyne and his scientific team reached this conclusion
after studying the heavens from the astrophysical research
center located at the Papal summer residence at Castelgandolfo
near Rome.

"The universe is so vast that it would be madness to think that
we're an exception," said Coyne in an interview with the Milan
newspaper "Corriere della Sera", underlining that "each day new
data is amassed" which leads to the possibility of life forms
different from those found on Earth. "The more we study the
stars, the more aware we become of our own ignorance," he adds.

The Jesuit priest, responsible since 1978 for an observatory
with more than a century of history behind it and reporting
directly to the Holy See, states that "Science does not
undermine faith; rather, it stimulates it."

He admits not having any proof of extraterrestrial life.

However, he admits that while there is no scientific evidence
today that proves the existence of life beyond Earth, Coyne is
aware that this eventuality opens a disquieting series of
mysteries for believers, and represents "a great challenge", but
that it should not be considered to be a "dramatic" event.

In this regard, the astronomer points out that certain sectors
of the Church consider it negative to debate or study matters
which could make Catholic doctrine "tremble somewhat." However,
he insists that there is not necessarily any conflict between
the Biblical origin of the Cosmos and the current ones being
championed by science, such as the Big Bang.

###################

Translation (C) 2002. Scott Corrales, Institute of Hispanic
Ufology. Special Thanks to S.I.B. Betelgeuse, Spain.

------------------------------------------------------------
THE ELECTRIC WARRIOR
January 9, 2002
Silicon Valley, CA
http://www.electricwarrior.com

------------------------------------------------------------
Web developers, the URL address for this content is:
http://www.electricwarrior.com/news/ewNews003A.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                    'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:22:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:22:54 -0500
Subject: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991757

15:34 08 January 02

Will Knight


'Alien' message tests human decoders

A message that will be broadcast into space later in 2002 has
been released to scientists worldwide, to test that it can be
decoded easily. The researchers who devised the message
eventually hope to design a system that could automatically
decode an alien reply.

Unlike previous interstellar broadcasts, the new message is
designed to withstand significant interference and interruption
during transmission.

"People have tried sending messages in the past, but have not
accounted for noise," says Yvan Dutil, who currently works for a
Canadian telecommunications company, but developed the message
as a private project with Stephane Dumas, who works at the
Defence Research Establishment Atlantic in Canada.

If new message had been based on language, it would be
impossible for an alien intelligence to decode it. So, instead,
a two-dimensional image was converted into a binary string of
ones and zeros. These can then easily be transmitted as a radio
or laser signal.

"Currently, most resources are focused on signal detection, and
not message composition or decoding," says Brian McConnel,
author of Beyond Contact: A Guide to SETI and Communicating with
Alien Civilisations. "I think it is important to research the
latter because the worst-case scenario would be positive
confirmation of an ET signal that nobody can comprehend."


Alien code

The image has not been revealed to those playing the role of
alien decoders and about 10 per cent meaningless noise has been
added to the data. Some parts have even been deleted. This
degradation of the message is intended to simulate the
interference that might be experienced during transmission to
distant planets.

Dutil says that the binary string is designed to provide clues
that should make it decipherable even with such significant
disruption.

The sensitivity of interplanetary communications was
demonstrated in 1999 when a previous message written by Dutil
and Dumas was found to contain an error that could have
seriously confused an alien recipient if it had not been
corrected in the nick of time.


Automatic decoding

The pair have an even grander plan for the future - to develop a
software system that can automatically decode alien messages,
regardless of excess noise.

A number of telescopes around the world are used to search for
patterns in the radio waves that reach Earth. Dutil says that if
a message were identified, it might be possible to decode it
using an automated system based on well-developed techniques
used in cryptanalysis, as well as principles of linguistic and
statistical analysis.

However, Douglas Vakoch, head of the Interstellar Message Group
at the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute
in California, says that deciphering a reply may prove very
tricky.

"Our biggest challenge will be to keep open to new types of
messages that we had not previously considered," he says.
"That's why the SETI Institute is sponsoring a series of
workshops on interstellar message composition, aimed at
identifying radically new ways of constructing messages."

The new message can be downloaded from the project homepage.
Dutil and Dumas hope that it will be transmitted by laser as
early as February 2002, by Celestis, a US company specialising
in space projects.


[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

             Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders - Rotstan

From: Karl Rotstan <rotstan@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:45:03 -0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:18:23 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders - Rotstan


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:22:54 -0500
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders

 >Source: New Scientist

 >http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991757

 >15:34 08 January 02

 >Will Knight

 >'Alien' message tests human decoders

 >A message that will be broadcast into space later in 2002 has
 >been released to scientists worldwide, to test that it can be
 >decoded easily. The researchers who devised the message
 >eventually hope to design a system that could automatically
 >decode an alien reply.

 >Unlike previous interstellar broadcasts, the new message is
 >designed to withstand significant interference and interruption
 >during transmission.

 >"People have tried sending messages in the past, but have not
 >accounted for noise," says Yvan Dutil, who currently works for a
 >Canadian telecommunications company, but developed the message
 >as a private project with Stephane Dumas, who works at the
 >Defence Research Establishment Atlantic in Canada.

 >If new message had been based on language, it would be
 >impossible for an alien intelligence to decode it. So, instead,
 >a two-dimensional image was converted into a binary string of
 >ones and zeros. These can then easily be transmitted as a radio
 >or laser signal.

 >"Currently, most resources are focused on signal detection, and
 >not message composition or decoding," says Brian McConnel,
 >author of Beyond Contact: A Guide to SETI and Communicating with
 >Alien Civilisations. "I think it is important to research the
 >latter because the worst-case scenario would be positive
 >confirmation of an ET signal that nobody can comprehend."

 >Alien code

 >The image has not been revealed to those playing the role of
 >alien decoders and about 10 per cent meaningless noise has been
 >added to the data. Some parts have even been deleted. This
 >degradation of the message is intended to simulate the
 >interference that might be experienced during transmission to
 >distant planets.

 >Dutil says that the binary string is designed to provide clues
 >that should make it decipherable even with such significant
 >disruption.

 >The sensitivity of interplanetary communications was
 >demonstrated in 1999 when a previous message written by Dutil
 >and Dumas was found to contain an error that could have
 >seriously confused an alien recipient if it had not been
 >corrected in the nick of time.

 >Automatic decoding

 >The pair have an even grander plan for the future - to develop a
 >software system that can automatically decode alien messages,
 >regardless of excess noise.

 >A number of telescopes around the world are used to search for
 >patterns in the radio waves that reach Earth. Dutil says that if
 >a message were identified, it might be possible to decode it
 >using an automated system based on well-developed techniques
 >used in cryptanalysis, as well as principles of linguistic and
 >statistical analysis.

 >However, Douglas Vakoch, head of the Interstellar Message Group
 >at the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Institute
 >in California, says that deciphering a reply may prove very
 >tricky.

 >"Our biggest challenge will be to keep open to new types of
 >messages that we had not previously considered," he says.
 >"That's why the SETI Institute is sponsoring a series of
 >workshops on interstellar message composition, aimed at
 >identifying radically new ways of constructing messages."

 >The new message can be downloaded from the project homepage.
 >Dutil and Dumas hope that it will be transmitted by laser as
 >early as February 2002, by Celestis, a US company specialising
 >in space projects.

 >[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]



Hi all,

Attached* is an MS Word file which decodes the picture in the
message. It seems to be a variety of images, including a map of
the earth, human figures, apparently some chemical diagrams
(carbon chains?) and others. It only took a few minutes to pull
this out, so I reckon our alien friends will be able to figure
it out quickly too. I am sure others can improve on this, but I
thought I'd share these initial results.

Karl


*[Go to: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/
   click 'List Attachments' follow links --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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

               Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object -

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 02:19:39 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:51:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object -


 >Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 12:38:28 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Source: WKMG TV - Orlando, Florida

 >>http://www.mycfnow.com/orlpn/news/stories/news-117686420020107-090141.html

 >>Man Wants $10 Million For Strange Object
 >>Newspaper Ad Claims Object Can Explain Antigravity

 >>Posted: 10:20 a.m. EST January 7, 2002
 >>Updated: 11:35 a.m. EST January 7, 2002

 >>Port St. John, Fla. - A Florida man wants $10 million for an
 >>object that he says came from an UFO, Local 6 News reported.

 >>James Hughes recently took out an advertisement in The Florida
 >>Today newspaper for an object he said could hold the secret to
 >>antigravity.

 >>Hughes told Local 6 News reporter Donald Forbes that his friend
 >>was in a New Jersey garbage dump 45 years ago when a
 >>cigar-shaped UFO dumped the rock-looking piece. He said that his
 >>friend gave him the object because he was a physicist.

 ><snip>

 ><LOL>

 >It's nice to know that UFOs do not use the _whole_ earth as a
 >garbage dump, only the places which we humans have designated as
 >garbage dumps. If the aliens were dumping it, could it be that
 >it no longer worked and was garbage? Or may be aliens eat rocks
 >and this rock was too old to eat so they dumped it......

 >That guy better take the 7.5 million offer while its still hot
 >(if it is hot).


Hello Bruce:

Amazing.

- Larry








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                  Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:53:02 -0500
Subject: Re:  NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark


 >Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >people at the private White House screening.

 >Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.


I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
like one.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

               Re: Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders -

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 07:05:56 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:56:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Re: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders -


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:22:54 -0500
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: 'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders

 >Source: New Scientist

 >http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991757

 >15:34 08 January 02

 >Will Knight

 >'Alien' message tests human decoders

 >A message that will be broadcast into space later in 2002 has
 >been released to scientists worldwide, to test that it can be
 >decoded easily. The researchers who devised the message
 >eventually hope to design a system that could automatically
 >decode an alien reply.

 >Unlike previous interstellar broadcasts, the new message is
 >designed to withstand significant interference and interruption
 >during transmission.

 >"People have tried sending messages in the past, but have not
 >accounted for noise," says Yvan Dutil, who currently works for a
 >Canadian telecommunications company, but developed the message
 >as a private project with Stephane Dumas, who works at the
 >Defence Research Establishment Atlantic in Canada.

 >If new message had been based on language, it would be
 >impossible for an alien intelligence to decode it. So, instead,
 >a two-dimensional image was converted into a binary string of
 >ones and zeros. These can then easily be transmitted as a radio
 >or laser signal.

 >"Currently, most resources are focused on signal detection, and
 >not message composition or decoding," says Brian McConnel,
 >author of Beyond Contact: A Guide to SETI and Communicating with
 >Alien Civilisations. "I think it is important to research the
 >latter because the worst-case scenario would be positive
 >confirmation of an ET signal that nobody can comprehend."

If you have seen the film 'A Beautiful Mind' depicting the code
breaking abilities of John Forbes Nash Jr., then one would be
convinced that he and other superb code breakers would be the
ones to examine candidate alien transmissions. If you have
read the book, you won't see the reference to code breaking
shown in the movie.

Of course, if ETs have been decoding our signals and our language
from their spacecraft fly-overs, then they may not be transmitting
anything enigmatic (or maybe they just make glyphs in crops).

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                         Filer's Files - #02 - 2002

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:33:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:06:46 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files - #02 - 2002


FILER'S FILES #02-2002 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
January 9, 2002, Majorstar@AOL.COM.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.cewarren.com

UFOs HAVE BEEN REPORTED in Maryland, Virginia, Wisconsin,
Montana, Washington, California, the United Kingdom and
Indonesia. The number of UFO reports dropped sharply during the
Holidays as they have done in recent years, but have increased
during January 2002.

SIGNS OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE

Leonard David, Senior Space Writer reports, Looking for life
elsewhere is a tough task for human or robot. The good news is
that the scientific skill and tools to search for, detect, and
inspect extraterrestrial life are advancing rapidly. A
revolution in the field of microbiology is afoot, along with
extraordinary progress in understanding the "geobiological"
history of Earth. And then there's growing amazement about life
on this planet and how it can survive and thrive even in the
most extreme and bizarre of environments. For example, within
the last ten years, more than 1,500 new species of
microorganisms have been discovered and genetically sequenced.
In a just issued report, "Signs of Life," a multidisciplinary
group of scientists grappled with techniques and technologies
to detect evidence for extraterrestrial life -- either on the
spot on other worlds, or within prime pickings hauled back to
Earth by robotic spacecraft. Spurred largely by an April 2000
workshop Nation! al Research Council (NRC) Committee on the
Origins and Evolution of Life many attendees are developing
techniques to detect life, and modeling the environments in
which such techniques might be used on other planets.
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/lifesigns_spots_020103.html

Editors Note: Some scientists now believe that the 1976
landings of two Viking Landers actually found the presence of
life on Mars, but the positive results were wrongly
interpreted. The technological ability to spot life on
celestial bodies has made impressive strides and don't be
surprised that new announcements may be forth coming. The
December 5 to 17, 2001, STS-108 NASA Shuttle flight encountered
UFOs during its mission. The shuttle video according to Jeff
Challender shows the sunset in space and the tail of the
shuttle disappears going into the evening terminator. However,
an unidentified flying object is pulsating slowly in the
distance. The object is further out in space still in the sun
light above the earth. The object is clearly blinking its
lights.

"IT'S MADNESS TO BELIEVE THAT MAN IS ALONE":

Vatican Astronomer -- Jesuit George Coyne, director of the
Vatican Observatory, is convinced of the existence of
extraterrestrial life and states that it is "madness" to think
than humans are alone in the universe. Father Coyne and his
scientific team reached this conclusion after studying the
heavens from the astrophysical research center located at
Castelgandolfo near Rome.

"The universe is so vast that it would be madness to think that
we're an exception," said Coyne in an interview with the Milan
newspaper "Corriere della Sera", underlining that "each day new
data is amassed" which leads to the possibility of life forms
different from those found on Earth. "The more we study the
stars, the more aware we become of our own ignorance," he adds.
The Jesuit priest, responsible since 1978 for an observatory
with more than a century of history behind it and reporting
directly to the Holy See, states that "Science does not
undermine faith; rather, it stimulates it." He admits not
having any proof of extraterrestrial life. He insists that
there is not necessarily any conflict between the Biblical
origin of the Cosmos and the current ones being championed by
science, such as the Big Bang. Thanks to Translation (C) 2001.
Scott Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology.

TELESCOPE TECHNOLOGY MAY YIELD IMAGES OF EXTRA-SOLAR PLANETS

William Harwood Special to The Washington Post reports that,
"Ground-based telescopes equipped with computer-controlled,
flexible mirrors to counteract the blurring turbulence of
Earth's atmosphere are on the verge of being able to photograph
large planets orbiting nearby sun-like stars. While about 80
extra-solar planets have been discovered using indirect
techniques -- measuring the effects of an unseen planet's
gravity on the parent star, for example -- no one has directly
made an image of a planet orbiting another sun. But two
discoveries reported yesterday at the winter meeting of the
American Astronomical Society here indicate the rapidly
maturing technology known as adaptive optics almost certainly
will allow ground-based astronomers to do just that in a few
years, if not sooner. "It's technically now possible to
directly image a young Jupiter around a nearby young star,"
said Ray Jayawardhana, an astronomer at the University of
California at Berkeley. "We have not di! rectly imaged a young
planet yet. But it could very well happen in the next few
years, so keep your eyes and ears open." With adaptive optics,
a thin secondary mirror is precisely flexed many times per
second under computer control so it can largely reverse the
effects of atmospheric turbulence on light entering the
telescope. The result is a much sharper image. snip." (c) 2002
The Washington Post Company January 8, 2002; Page A03

MARYLAND FLUORESCENT GREEN BLUE CENTERED EGG SHAPED OBJECT

BEL AIR -- As we were driving south bound on Tollgate Road on
January 7, 2002, we saw a bright fluorescent green colored
glowing egg shaped object with a faint blue center. It was
traveling from northeast to southwest at 5:49 PM, and seamed to
suddenly drop from the sky. It followed a path that started
high and decreased lower in the sky even though when the object
did disappear it was still very high but lower from where it
started. We listened for an explosion like fireworks, but we
heard or saw nothing. We figured it could not have been a
meteor because the object would have been white, red, or yellow
and it would have not followed a curved arc shaped path. The
object from our car window was very large and it was traveling
at an extremely fast pace, like a falling star. The object had
a faint blue center surrounded in green. There was no tail. You
could definitely see a blue dot in the center of the object and
you could also notice where the objects edges were. When the o!
bject disappeared it was going very fast and was still very
high above the horizon. It disappeared instantly with no
explosion, sound, or change of shape or color.

BALTIMORE -- The witness noticed a streaking white light
similar to a "shooting star" flying over on January 7, 2002, at
5:55 PM, but it was two or three times larger. The light
suddenly turned into a blue light that was even larger and then
accelerated forward at an incredible rate and was no longer
visible. Thanks to Peter B. Davenport, Director, National UFO
Reporting Center director@ufocenter.com, www.UFOCENTER.com,
Hotline: (206) 722-3000

VIRGINIA HORIZONTAL MOVING BLUISH GREEN LIGHT

RICHMOND -- The witness was in parking lot at Midlothian
Turnpike at 5:45 PM when he noticed a colored light flying over
on January 7, 2002. At first he thought it was a low flying
airplane, but it caught his eye because the color was a
beautiful bluish green and very bright. The witness reports, "I
noticed it was moving at a steady rate of speed and no other
lights and no sound. I then noticed how fast it was moving and
yelled at my coworker to look but it passed very quickly
horizontally from west to east at what appeared to be exactly
the same altitude. It didn't look like a shooting star-because
it was too low, no tail, and the light was a steady rate of
speed and much too fast & silent for an aircraft. Thanks to
NUFORC www.UFOCENTER.com,

ILLINOIS CESSNA DISAPPEARS IN THE TRIANGLE

LAKE MICHIGAN -- A small Cessna airplane, with four people
aboard, disappeared over Lake Michigan Sunday," December 9,
2001, near Wilmette Harbor. "A search for four people, missing
since their small rented airplane apparently plunged into Lake
Michigan was suspended shortly after sundown Monday," December
10, 2001. "The Coast Guard Group Milwaukee failed to turn up
any sign of the missing single-engine Cessna aircraft that was
carrying four people, including three licensed pilots. the
Chicago Tribune for December 11, 2001, "Plane search stops as
hope fades," page 7.) Thanks to Joe Trainor, Editor UFO Roundup
1/7/02 Note: This is the latest in a long series of small
aircraft that have vanished without a trace over Lake Michigan.
For more, read "The Great Lakes Triangle" by Jay Gourley,
Fawcett Gold Medal Books, New York, NY, 1977.)

WISCONSIN FLYING OBJECT

WATERFORD, RACINE COUNTY -- UFOWisconsin reports that the
witness who wishes to remain anonymous stated, "I was sitting
out by the farm areas with my son on January 5, 2002, just
north of Wind Lake and just south of Waterford. I was looking
at the stars when I saw something that was square shaped that
stopped for about 30 seconds. It then started moving slowly and
disappeared. I would have thought that I was seeing things, but
my son who is 13 years old, pointed it out to me. Note: We are
trying to follow up with this witness. We found it unusual that
the object he saw in the sky was square shaped. Thanks to
jenny@ufowisconsin.com,
http://www.ufowisconsin.com/county/reports/r2002_0105_racine.ht
ml

MONTANA STRANGE LIGHTS

BILLINGS -- Unusual white lights were spotted hovering over the
West End of Billings Saturday at about 6:00 PM. A woman and her
husband were in their pickup truck when they spotted a lighted
half-spherical object hover about 1,000 feet above 36th Street
West. The object had one flashing light and hovered for about
four minutes. "My husband knows airplanes and he said, `"Those
aren't any airplane lights." As soon as he said that, it took
off," she said. "Within two seconds, we couldn't see it. It was
that fast. I don't know what to make of it." A Billings man who
spends most of his evening riding a bicycle in the downtown
area said he spotted the flying object, but thought it was just
a very fast aircraft. Thanks to The Billings Gazette, Copyright
(c) and Louise A. Lowry
http://www.ufoxfiles.com/WorldOfTheStrange/default.asp

MONTANA INVESTIGATION OF A REPORT OF ANIMAL MUTILATION

DUPUYER -- National Institute for Discovery Science" NIDS
received a call from local law enforcement regarding a six-year
old Red Angus cow found dead at 8:00-9:00 AM on July 27, 2001.
The animal was lying on its right side. The left eye and eyelid
were missing, the hide from the left jaw was missing and parts
of the tongue were gone. The vagina and rectum were also
missing. A thorough examination of the area by law enforcement
failed to reveal any tracks, markings or signs of struggle from
the animal. When the hide under the left jaw was cut away,
investigators noticed a greenish-colored tissue mass just under
the jaw. The green color markedly contrasted with the pink
color of the surrounding tissue. Because of the ambient
temperature and humidity in the area and to prevent further
decomposition, the head of the animal was severed and
immediately frozen. After the head was thoroughly frozen it was
shipped to NIDS in Las Vegas and stored at -85=BAC to prevent
further decomposi! tion.

NIDS then consulted with a forensic expert, whose analysis of
the eyes and jaw showed no blood in the tissue, indicating that
the heart had stopped beating upon removal of the tissues. If
the animal was mutilated, the mutilation occurred after death.
In addition to the gross pathology, samples of eye fluid from
the animal's right eye and tissue from the neck area were
collected. A comprehensive set of organic extraction procedures
followed by Infrared spectrometry and gas chromatography mass
spectrometry (GCMS) analysis were conducted to determine the
molecular components in the eye fluid and tissues. Preliminary
chemical analysis was also conducted on maggot mass from the
animal. A second animal was obtained from a slaughterhouse and
left to decompose for four days as a sham or control animal.
Tissue and eye fluid from the control animal was subjected to
identical extraction and analytical procedures.

A compound called oxindole was found in both tissue and eye
fluid from the mutilated animal but not in the control animal,
suggesting oxindole was not a decomposition product. The
clinical and pharmacological properties of oxindole in animals
cause profound sedation, decrease in blood pressure, decrease
in muscular tone and loss of consciousness (Orcutt et al.
(1964) Arch. Int. Pharmacodynam. 152, 121-131). Our failure to
find oxindole in the control animal leads us to the working
hypothesis that oxindole may have been used to sedate the
animal prior to its death and mutilation. Similar analyses of
different mutilated animals in the future will either
substantiate or negate this working hypothesis. For example,
the pharmacokinetic data on administration of oxindole to large
animals is scanty as are the data on the extent of rumen-saliva
recycling of tryptophan metabolites. A second hypothesis is
that a traumatic event triggered the swift accumulation of
oxindole in the tissu! es of the mutilated animal but not in the
control animal. Since the summer of 2001, NIDS has received
over eight reports of animal mutilations from Montana, the
majority of which were too old to seriously investigate.
Nevertheless, this number of reports in a few months
constitutes by far the largest report frequency received in the
history of NIDS investigations of the animal mutilation
phenomenon. Therefore, the present case should be seen not as
an isolated incident, but in the context of a wave of
mutilation reports in 2001 from Montana. It should also be
noted that during the period 1974-1977, the Great Falls area of
Montana was the focus of an intense wave of animal mutilations.
NIDS is gratified by the increasing spirit of cooperation
between our organization and ranchers, law enforcement
officials and veterinarians. Call NIDS at (702-798-1700) The
full 50 page report with photographs at http://www.nidsci.org.
NIDS@lb.bcentral.com

WASHINGTON LARGE BLACK FLYING OBJECTS

PORT ANGELES -- My husband was outside on December 29, 2001,
watching the sky as he often does, waiting for me to get ready.
He observed a huge black object above him at 4:20 PM seemingly
cloaked in the clouds. It was a calm day, with a partial cloud
cover and no wind. He watched the object(s) for a minute then
ran in to yell for me to "come now PLEASE!" I ran outside and
he related to me what he had seen, since the object was no
longer there. He described it as a huge black "wall," but it
almost seemed to be changing shapes within the cloud. He said
it was at least two football fields in length. We continued to
watch the sky and a minute later, we both observed a solid,
black disc shaped object fall like a leaf from the clouds,
about 1/2 mile from where the object originally was seen by my
husband. It seemed to be heading north just above the treeline,
so we didn't see where it went, just that it fell. Then
directly above that, in the clouds again, I saw what appeared
to be! two large black objects "dancing" in the clouds. I
immediately said "oh, look honey, they're hang-gliders!"
However, they were quite large, in fact it could have been one
object, as the clouds were obscuring parts of whatever I was
seeing. They or it continued moving for about 10 seconds, and
then completely disappeared into the cloud cover. This is the
first time either of us has witnessed anything remotely
unexplainable in the sky. We are at a complete loss as to how
to explain it. We've thought of kites, hang-gliders, balloons,
airplanes, blimps, stealth bombers, none of it seems to fit.
There were no visible lights on the object(s); it was just big
and black. It made no noise. It was afternoon, with about 1
hour left of good daylight. I am a professional, working in the
health care field here in town. My husband is a stay at home
dad, caring for our 2 year old son. We have been going nuts
trying to figure this out. Thanks to Peter Davenport, NUFORC
www.UFOCENTER.com, Ho! tline: (206) 722-3000

CALIFORNIA FIVE LUMINESCENT OBJECTS

TURLOCK --On January 7, 2002, five objects were observed flying
in single file by a qualified aerospace observer. The objects
were equally spaced and flying on west trajectory without
navigation lights. The objects were white luminescent and
observed for approximately 10 seconds. The observer was in
process of aligning Jupiter with 6.3 mm eyepiece and looked up
from telescope at 9:03 PM and noticed what first appeared to be
meteorites, however, the objects were moving at only 1/2 speed
of meteorites as compared to Leonid shower average. They were
first observed at 35 degrees elevation in the East (plus or
minus 5 degrees) and last observed at 30 degrees elevation West
(plus or minus 5 degrees). The flying objects did not deviate
trajectory, but remained single file, equally spaced. The
objects had approximately one degree of spacing between them as
observed from the ground. No sound was heard. Jupiter was
beginning to blur slightly due to fog. My hypothesis is that
the objec! ts appeared to be in low Earth orbit, allowing
sunlight to be reflected, causing a white luminous appearance.
The objects may have been space debris, but unusual due to the
exact same spacing between them. No classification has been set
at this time. The observer has spent 27 years in the aerospace
environment, with full knowledge of all nonclassified aircraft,
and limited classified aircraft including SR 71 and Air
Transport experience with nighttime identification capabilities
for most aircraft.

ALLBROOK -- On January 6, 2002, the witness was walking his dog
about 9:30 PM, when he heard a military jet approaching from
the southeast. He states, "I saw a light which appeared to be a
jet followed by another fighter jet, then all of a sudden the
second fighter hit the after burner to increase its speed. The
jet appeared to be trying to catch the first object. When the
jet finally got close to the first object, it made a 90 degree
turn, and just flew off to the south and was gone in a blink of
a eye. The second fighter turned around and headed back towards
Miramar Base. I have never seen an object change direction so
quickly and have a speed well above anything we have; I would
guess it flew at a speed of 5000 miles per hour. It was out of
sight in a less than a tenth of a second. I just got a glimpse
of its tremendous speed out of the corner of my eye. We rarely
have any military fighters fly over. They were probably flying
under 20,000 feet and none have ever kicked in! their after
burners. Thanks to Peter B. Davenport, Director, National UFO
Reporting Center director@ufocenter.com, www.UFOCENTER.com,
Hotline: (206) 722-3000

MEXICAN SIGHTINGS CONTINUE AT POPOCATP=C9TL VOLCANO

Troy Allen called to report he is monitoring the Popocatp=E9tl
Volcano video camera site near Mexico City on an almost daily
basis. The volcano's observation camera is showing many UFOs
often in a triangle formation as recently as January 8, 2002.
Over a hundred Dark colored UFOs images have been seen in
recent months. UFO s have had an interest in the volcano since
its December 21, 1994, eruption, ending decades of slumber.
UFOs that are small elliptical colored lights that change color
from green, to blue, to pink, to purple. They are more or less
stationary and a larger roundish or flattened white light moves
from snapshot to snapshot. There are often more than one dark
colored objects observed moving around the area. They will
often move from the distance forward and then retreat. Due to
the possibility of explosive eruptions, people are warned not
to approach the volcano to closer than 12 kilometers from the
crater. However, the road between Santiago Xalitzintla and San
P! edro Nexapa, including Paso de Cort=E9s, is open for controlled
circulation. Photos at:
http://looknowings.homestead.com/camview.html and
http://www.cenapred.unam.mx/mvolcan.html (enter Monitoreo
volcanico, Tamano A) Thanks to Troy Allen
http://www.alienjoes.com.

UNITED KINGDOM UFO FILES RELEASED

A UFO cover-up has been revealed by Stephen Biscoe at the
height of the Cold War. UFO fever was so rampant in the UK that
the Ministry of Defence set up a secret working party to try to
establish if Earth really was under observation by visiting
aliens. It involved experts from the Directorate of Scientific
Intelligence and the Joint Technical Intelligence Committee,
and eventually they produced a report. Then the MoD spent the
next 49 years denying it ever existed. Yesterday, the Public
Record Office (PRO) made the papers public, but only after
their existence had been admitted to a local government Press
officer working in South Yorkshire. Had it not been for Dr.
David Clarke, who lives in Sheffield and works for Rotherham
Council, it is unlikely that they would have come to light.
Clarke combines his local government job with an academic
career, which has made him one of the country's leading
folklore experts. A researcher at the National Centre for
English Cultural Tradi! tion at Sheffield University, he is the
author of several books on a range of folkloric traditions from
stone heads and ghosts to UFO sightings and Close Encounters.
His latest book "Out of the Shadows," to be published in May by
Piatkus, draws on the two years of research he has been
carrying out for a post-doctoral study. In the course of it, he
came across references in official government documents to the
report of the secret working party set up on Churchill's orders
in 1950 to investigate reports of UFO sightings. In 1980, the
30-year rule ended its term of confidentiality -- but the rule
was ignored and it remained secret. Clarke says, in fact, that
he was repeatedly told by the MoD that no such report existed;
it even denied the existence of the working party. Yet the
Sheffield researcher was still coming across references to
both.

OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND -- On Thursday, December 27, 2001, Sarah
H. reports, "I was driving away from Wytham village, on a
two-lane country road "towards Botley Interchange, the road
running parallel to Motorway A34 at 8:45 PM." "The UFO hovered
west of the road, remaining in one position," Sarah reported,
"The UFO was triangular in shape with one light at each point
(corner). It was hovering above Withal Wood and was silent. It
hovered for approximately four minutes, no higher than 200 feet
above the trees. Its fuselage was dark." Sarah added, "I have
no pictorial evidence" of the encounter, and she feels a bit
"nervous about being considered a loony." Thanks to UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 7, Number 1 January 1, 2002 Editor: Joseph Trainor
http://ufoinfo.com

IPSWICH, ENGLAND -- Nick Richards of The Ipswich Star, Suffolk
reports that, "An Ipswich household was treated to an extra
special sight on Christmas Day when they saw what appeared to
be an unidentified flying object. The family, who asked not to
be named, saw the strange flashing object from their house in
Valley Road, just 24 hours after Santa would have been in the
middle of his Christmas deliveries. The mother of the family
told the Star that the strange sight occurred just before the
early hours of Boxing Day. "At about midnight my husband
noticed a very bright light. He called me to look at it and I
saw what seemed to be a large star. The strange thing was that
our room was illuminated by the very strong light, which it
emitted. "I would normally have likened it to moonlight, but
there was no moon to be seen. My husband continued to watch it
as I fell asleep. He called me a few minutes later to tell me
that it was flashing and emitting a blue hue around its base.
He a! lso saw two diagonal protrusions from either side towards
the bottom." The object, which was oval in shape, was smaller
than the moon but bigger than a star and was viewed from Valley
Road towards the Portman Road area. The family said that they
knew it wasn't an airplane, a helicopter or even Christmas
lights. They said that if was a star it would have been there
the following night, but it left the Ipswich skyline after
performing its ten-minute light show. 12/29/01 The Ipswich Star
Thanks to FarShores UFO News
-www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/index.htm

UFO SIGHTINGS DOUBLE IN MALAYSIA

Sightings of UFOs in Malaysia have doubled in the past year and
one man claims he was abducted for eleven days after meeting a
square-headed alien. The Centre for Malaysian UFO Studies says
six sightings were reported last year as opposed to three in
2000. Ufologist Ahmad Jamaludin, from the centre, says three of
the sightings were reported in Sabah, two in Kedah and the
other in Penang. Of the abduction in February, he told The
Star: "This could be the first reported UFO abduction in
Malaysia. Although the eleven-day period was a little odd, as
most UFO abduction victims usually go missing for two to three
hours or up to five days only. "The fact that there were some
UFO activities around Kota Kinabalu at that time could lend
some credence to the claim." Ahmad, who has studied UFOs since
1978, says his research on the phenomenon shows there is a link
between the UFO sightings and Earth's seismic activity.
"Gravitational forces emitted by objects in space cause the
Earth's f! ault lines to shake, causing earthquakes and, at the
same time, act as a guide for UFOs to reach Earth," he said.
Story filed: January 7, 2002, Thanks to lornis1@juno.com

ARE THESE UFOs OURS?

Has it ever dawned on anyone that some of the stuff flying
around is ours? T.Townsend Brown duplicated one of these
propulsion systems in the late 50s it was classified and
government contractors have been working on it ever since.
Brown was swept under the rug as far as recognition goes.
Scientists in his corner have written papers about it. The rest
feel they might sully their image. Its been kept under wraps
for a long time. Its like the mentality that Egyptians didn't
build the pyramids themselves because humans are stupid. Read
what Janes publications says about the B2 if it hasn't been
deleted by know. Thanks to Janoshek zsazsal@bellatlantic.net

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. I feel confident we could go into a
court of law and convince any jury that there are UFOs moving
at high speed around the Earth. Send $25 to: Jeff Challender
2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento, California 95833-2011. Jeff has
had an operation on his back and is still in pain, we ask you
to send your prayers.

NEW UFO STORE IS NOW OPEN


The new UFO Store is open on our web site with some of the best
UFO books and paraphernalia available. Help support UFO
research by purchasing through us! Filer's Files is dedicated
to uncovering the truth about UFOs and has sent them out free
since January 1997. Your support is needed to cover expenses,
and when you shop in our store, you get the satisfaction of
quality products, with the knowledge that you have helped
support the search for the truth. Come help our adventure,
while supporting UFO research! Order online today, at
http://www.filersfiles.com/ufostore/index.htm

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 the complete
files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its
editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. 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. Caution,
most of these are initial reports and require further
investigation.

The MUFON Journal in February will be running a fascinating
article on the evidence for the UFO Crash at Roswell in 1947 by
Niel Morris and RPIT. Order your subscribtion now to get the
article.

George A. Filer








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                          Secrecy News -- 01/10/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 10:42:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:05:39 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/10/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 4
January 10, 2002


**      NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LAW
**      BILL WOULD BAN SPACE-BASED MIND CONTROL WEAPONS


NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LAW

Contrary to an explicit legal requirement, the Pentagon has
still not produced an unclassified report on its Nuclear Posture
Review (NPR), which defines the role of nuclear weapons in U.S.
military strategy.

The Pentagon held a press briefing yesterday outlining the
conclusions of the Review, and released a three-page Foreword
from the otherwise classified report.

But, as noted by analyst David Isenberg and others, the FY 2001
Defense Authorization Act specifically directed that a report on
the Review be submitted in December 2001 "in unclassified and
classified forms as necessary."  See the statutory language
here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2000/npr.html

"It's hard to have any kind of public discussion or debate about
the issue until there's an unclassified version," Sen. Jeff
Bingaman (D-NM) told the Albuquerque Journal last week.  See
"Nuke Weapons Policy Still Secret" by John Fleck from the
January 5 Journal here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/aj010502.html

The January 9 Pentagon press briefing was a welcome, if not
quite satisfactory, occasion for government officials to be
questioned about U.S. nuclear policy, a topic that remains
largely shrouded in official secrecy.  See the transcript of the
briefing here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/npr-briefing.html

In a briefing slide describing the Congressional mandate to
conduct the Nuclear Posture Review, the Pentagon stated that a
"written report" was required, but neglected to note that it was
required in "unclassified form."  See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/020109-D-6570C-004.jpg

The unclassified Foreword to the classified NPR report is posted
here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/npr-foreword.html

Whether this Foreword, which merely presents "a summary of the
highlights" of the report, satisfies the requirement for an
unclassified report will ultimately be for Congress to decide
after it returns on January 23.

Secretary Rumsfeld said last week that he had requested
preparation of a declassified version of the NPR report, but it
remained unclear whether or when that would be accomplished.


BILL WOULD BAN SPACE-BASED MIND CONTROL WEAPONS

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) introduced a bill in the House of
Representatives late last year that would ban weapons in space.
But while there have been many similar legislative initiatives
in the past, Rep. Kucinich's bill is distinguished by its
unusually expansive definition of "weapons."

Among the weapons that it would proscribe the new measure
includes "psychotronic" devices that are "directed at individual
persons or targeted populations for the purpose of ... mood
management, or mind control."

No explanation for this peculiar proposal was immediately
available. But the text of "The Space Preservation Act of 2001"
(H.R. 2977), introduced on October 2, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html

The Kucinich bill was hailed by Citizens Against Human Rights
Abuse, one of a number of organizations of people who say they
are victims of government experimentation involving
electromagnetic and other psychotronic weapons.  See their web
site here:

http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/~welsh/

The bill has been referred to three House Committees.


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to majordomo@lists.fas.org with
this command in the body of the message:
subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                  Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:07:06 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark
 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600

 >>Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >>1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >>screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >>Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >>stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >>agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >>people at the private White House screening.

 >>Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >>Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >>Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >>the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >>know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >>of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >>Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.

 >I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
 >this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
 >like one.


Hi Jerry, All,

Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this story?
I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an e-mail address
for either Spielberg's offices or Dreamworks, I drew a blank on
both. If anyone has a contact address we could simply put the
question to him and then see if he chooses to respond.

After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried to
confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

Regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 10

                           Info On UFO Reseacher?

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:45:48 -0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:09:03 -0500
Subject: Info On UFO Reseacher?


Dear List Members:

I wonder if anyone on UFO UpDates could help me to find
information about Marshall Lee, who I believe is an American UFO
researcher, lecturer and author. Apparently, he just published a
book about the Varginha Case in the US. Does anybody here know
him and/or have any reference about his work? Any e-mail address
or website?


Thanks!

A. J.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                 Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 10 Jan 2002 13:59:19 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:30:35 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Cameron


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark
 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600

 >>>Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>>Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >>>1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >>>screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >>>Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >>>stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >>>agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >>>people at the private White House screening.

 >>>Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >>>Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >>>Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >>>the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >>>know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >>>of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >>>Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.

 >>I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
 >>this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
 >>like one.

 >Hi Jerry, All,

 >Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this story?
 >I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an e-mail address
 >for either Spielberg's offices or Dreamworks, I drew a blank on
 >both. If anyone has a contact address we could simply put the
 >question to him and then see if he chooses to respond.

 >After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried to
 >confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

I wrote to Spielberg in January 1988 to confirm the story, but
the letter was cut off by Spielberg's publicity coordinator Kris
Kelley who stated "unfortunately, Mr. Spielberg is currently
away working on his next project and is unable to personally
answer your question." Another researcher, Linda Howe who worked
as a documentary film producer and author, also tried to
interview Spielberg about his Reagan encounter without success.

Florida Today reporter Billy Cox also made an attempt to confirm
the Spielberg story. He phoned Spielberg and ended up talking
with Spielberg publicist Marvin Levy. Levy stated that "Mr.
Spielberg does not wish to discuss any private conversation held
with the President."

The story was told to Jamie Shandera while with Spielberg in
Japan. I am sure Stanton Friedman would have some insight into
this story. Billy Cox, as I recall, also talked to Shandera.

Grant Cameron

Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.com
Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                 Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:36:35 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:34:08 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Tonnies


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

<snip>

 >Hi Jerry, All,

 >Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this story?
 >I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an e-mail address
 >for either Spielberg's offices or Dreamworks, I drew a blank on
 >both. If anyone has a contact address we could simply put the
 >question to him and then see if he chooses to respond.

 >After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried to
 >confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

I'm very doubtful about this Presidential anecdote. But the
story I've always heard was that somehow Spielberg relayed the
message to Jaime Shandera, and that Shandera told Stan Friedman.


=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                  Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Young

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 18:22:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:38:09 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Young


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this
 >story? I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an
 >e-mail address for either Spielberg's offices or
 >Dreamworks, I drew a blank on both. If anyone has a contact
 >address we could simply put the question to him and then see
 >if he chooses to respond.

 >After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried
 >to confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

John;

Well, I gave it a whirl last year by sending the following
letter off. But as you can imagine, Mr. Spielberg is not an easy
man to just pick up a phone and call. By the way, there was
absolutely no response to the letter, hmpf!


-- KY

====================

Mr. Andy Spahn
Senior Executive, DreamWorks SKG
100 Universal Plaza
Building 10
Universal City, CA 91608

December 26,2000

Dear Mr. Spahn,

My name is Kenny Young and I have been investigating
Unidentified Flying Objects reports and claims for several
years. I am trying to confirm or deny a strange account and I
sincerely hope you could assist.

It has often been repeated that Steven Spielberg, when attending
a screening of the movie E.T. with President Reagan at the
Whitehouse in the early 80s, had been told something of
interest. President Reagan reportedly took Mr. Spielberg aside
and told him something like this: "There are only a few people
in this room who really know the truth about UFOs."

This story has been widely circulated for years has taken a few
different forms, and was even afforded mention in the book
'Alien Contact: Top Secret UFO Files Revealed' by Timothy Good.

What I seek to do is to provide some sort of comment from Steven
Spielberg, if he would be so kind, to provide clarification on
this report. I am very curious to learn if it is true and what
President Reagan might have said to him.

I would appreciate your help Mr. Spahn, if you could kindly
bring this message to the attention of Mr. Spielberg. It is my
hope that a greater understanding of this issue result from this
effort. We all stand to gain by the accurate clarification of
this matter by Mr. Spielberg.


Take care and have a Happy New Year.

Kenny 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:44:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

Had a nice long fonecon [phone conversation] this afternoon with
Irving Newton, 78, of San Antonio, TX, the Ramey weatherman and
Roswell debris "identifier." He seemed pleased to hear from me
(we never had talked before) and was quite open and eager to
talk.

He has quite a collection of Roswell memorabilia and offered to
"lay it all out" if I will come to San Antonio to visit with
him. He has several copies -- but no negatives or originals --
of the photo of him in General Ramey's office. He has no idea
who took the photo. He confirmed most of the stories told about
him in the Roswell accounts, with a few notable exceptions:

He was the only weatherman on duty in air operations on
the late afternoon of July 8, 1947. They ran a 24 hour shop
and a weatherman was supposed to be in air operations at
all times.

He was summoned to Ramey's office first by Col. Dubose and then
personally by Gen. Ramey. He supports accounts of harsh language
from Ramey ordering him to Ramey's office. He thinks he arrived
at Ramey's office -- just a few blocks from air operations --
between 4:30 and 5 p.m. (That must have been only a short time
after I had finished taking my fotos and departed Ramey's
office.)

Newton was met and briefed by COL. Dubose who told him upon his
arrival at Ramey's office that the General was uncertain whether
this was a flying saucer and maybe it was a weather device, and
he wanted Newton to take a look. Newton said he took one look at
the debris spread out on the carpet and said "If that is not a
Rawin device I will eat it!"

Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

He says he has said this over and over for years to
interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
ignored his statements.

Newton seems to remember a few people in the office "taking
notes". He assumed them to be reporters. He was not too clear on
that point. It was not an especially momentous event for him. He
said that Major Marcel was there and followed him around the
office trying to get him to look at "some of the sticks" he was
holding and to see the strange symbols on them that Marcel
thought were "not of this world." He does recall seeing strange
random figures on some of these sticks.

This all follows closely several accounts that I have read about
Newton and his visit to Ramey's office. But there are mysteries
here: why was Marcel's hat and tie gone from the radiator in the
Newton foto? Would the major have gotten into uniform to talk
with a warrant officer when he didn't for a media photographer?
And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
the Ramey/Dubose photos?

In the days following, Newton received many phone calls and
letters from other AAF weathermen who had a variety of comments
for him, but not from the press at that time.

At a later time he was interviewed by Life Magazine and other
magazines and a TV company interviewed him on camera in his
home, etc.

He and his wife were flown to Roswell in July 1996 for him to
make a speech to tell his story. It was in an auditorium and
there was an admission charged. He described his experiences of
July 8, 1947, and told the audience that the debris in Ramey's
office was the "real stuff" that Marcel had brought from
Roswell, but that several of the reporters simply ignored his
statements in this regard. The inquiries have been few and far
between recently and he was not invited to attend the last two
Roswell anniversary bashes.

Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson. Marcel recalls his father
telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
was the "real stuff." Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
brought from Roswell. Johnson, after carefully and at length
interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!


--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                 Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 19:47:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:47:33 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Friedman


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark
 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600

 >>>Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>>Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >>>1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >>>screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >>>Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >>>stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >>>agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >>>people at the private White House screening.

 >>>Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >>>Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >>>Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >>>the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >>>know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >>>of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >>>Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.

 >>I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
 >>this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
 >>like one.

 >Hi Jerry, All,

 >Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this story?
 >I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an e-mail address
 >for either Spielberg's offices or Dreamworks, I drew a blank on
 >both. If anyone has a contact address we could simply put the
 >question to him and then see if he chooses to respond.

 >After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried to
 >confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?


Jaime Shandera told me the story about Reagan many years ago
and supposedly got it straight from Spielberg whom he knew.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                Cydonian Imperative: 01-10-02 New Evidence Of

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 20:08:32 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:49:06 -0500
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 01-10-02 New Evidence Of


The Cydonian Imperative
1-10-02

June, 2001 Face Prediction Verified
by Mac Tonnies

http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html


In June, I wrote the following concerning the symmetry of the
Face on Mars:

"I personally suspect that the 'harelip' was intended to mark
the Face's centerline as well as contribute to the eastern
half's feline anatomical impression. But in the new image, the
'harelip' appears too far west when compared to Mark Carlotto's
digital analysis of the non-orthorectified 1998 image. Based on
this apparent discrepancy, I predict that when and if NASA
deigns fit for the tax-paying public to examine the 'missing'
ancillary data, we will find that Carlotto was right all along."

The "harelip" feature referred to is the triangular features in
the center of the Face's "mouth." Sure enough, Carlotto's new
orthorectified vesion of the Face (see New Frontiers in Science)
shows that the geometric "harelip" lies at the exact center of
the Face formation, and not closer to the western side, as it
appears in previously available nonorthorectified images.

[image]

Mark Carlotto's new orthorectification is notably wider than the
better-known version published by NASA.


I find it of interest that my prediction wasn't based on
technical expertise or image interpretation, but on the
aesthetic significance posed by the harelip feature. The
"harelip," now seen in its proper position, fulfills an a priori
prediction and lends still further support to the hypothesis
that the Face is artificial in origin.

[image]

The controversial "nostril."

Even stranger, the new orthorectified image moves the "nostril"
feature into the exact center of the Face, where it appears to
align with similar circular features along the Face's vertical
axis. While this evidence of further bisymmetry is interesting,
it also tends to detract from the interpretation that the
depression in question was built to resemble a literal humanoid
nostril. If not part of a "nose," could the "nostril" feature
represent ornamentation, meteor impact, or unknown structural
function? (I suppose one could argue that the being depicted by
the Martian Face had only one nostril in the center of its face,
but this scenario is post priori and exceptionally porous.)

More independent analysis is forthcoming.

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

               Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:22:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:53:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines - Maccabee


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 10:36:06 EST
 >Subject: Re: Raelians, The Pope & Aborigines
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >When it comes to railing Rael's, the church is likely not
 >interested. Neither am I. In fact, anything which resembles a
 >cult, even just resembles one, is anathema. There is nothing
 >worse than extremism, even if it is extremeism in the name of
 >God. Who, if I were He, would likely wind up smashed every night
 >and every day. Who the hell could take us after all the work
 >done to make us? No one in his right mind.

 >Extremism takes many turns in life. But the worst type is the
 >extremist who believes that he is right in spite of everything;
 >all evidence, all argument and all logic. For the extremist is
 >not logical, the extremist is emotional. No thought, no sense,
 >common or otherwise. How a man or woman can beat himself into
 >that kind of frenzy is beyond my ken. Yet it is here among us.
 >On this list. In our lives. And in our nightmares. "Let freedom
 >ring" is a phrase many Americans use. The world should use
 >something similar. "Let reason ring."

The second most dangerous person in the world is the person who
_knows_ he is right. (How does he know? Often because he has
been "told" what is right by that book over there, or by some
guy(s) up there.)

The _most_ dangerous person in the world is the guy (or gal) who
_knows_ he is right (absolutely, positively, and if you don't
believe it I'll blow you away).

_and_

can gather about him/her a group of similar thinking people who
believe (accept as absolutely true) what he says (or at least
are having a good time doing whatever he tells them to do) and
are willing to do whatever he says including enforcing whatever
rules he may come up with (rule 1 for going to heaven is.....
rule 2 for going to heaven is... etc. and you better obey these
rules or I'll blow you away). These followers (marching morons?)
go out among the masses to spread the good word by force, as
with the Nazi SS or the Inquisition (you know, Torquemada at
Toledo... hmmm, that would make a good movie, plenty of
violence, religion and probably sex).

It's one thing to gain followers by presenting a point of view
and letting the listener/seer make up his/her own mind as to
whether or not to believe it and "follow."

Its quite another thing to gain followers by presenting a point
of view and then making the listener/seer an 'offer he/she can't
refuse' like 'join us or die'.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                    Re: Translators Still Needed - Latest

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:18:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:55:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Translators Still Needed - Latest



Hello All,

Volunteers are _still_ needed to translate several short
paragraphs into as many languages as possible. Results will be
posted for use by international respondents.

I now have translations in six (6) languages covered and
translator's names and organizations are next to the languages
below. I thank them for their speedy response to my request and
for their generous offer of their time and assistance.

I will continue to post the list to UFO UpDates until enough
commitments to perform translations into the many different
languages listed have been secured.

I know that we have Portuguese, Italian, Hebrew and Swedish
members on this List. I would really appreciate hearing from
you. The only thing holding us up at the moment is securing
these translations. If you can dedicate a small amount of time
to this project it would be greatly appreciated.

Translators, still needed, please, for the following:

Arabic     [All]
Balkan     [All]
Chinese    [All]
Danish
Dutch      Frits Westra -- Editor UFO-Niewsbrief/received
Finnish    Frits Westra -- Editor UFO-Niewsbrief/received
Flemish
French     Gilles Milot, Quebec Association of Ufology/not submitted yet
German     Alfred Lehmberg/received
Greek
Korean
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Norwegian
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian    Boris Shurinov/received
Slavic     [All]
Spanish    Luis Gonzales/not submitted yet
Swedish
Turkish
Ukranian
Vietnamese

the major African tongues and any other not listed above.
As you can see, we still have a long way to go.

If you can help, please contact me, privately, via:

john@virtuallystrange.net

Volunteers are asked to keep the content of the translations
private until formal, world-wide, public announcements are made.
I'm trying to get this posted in as timely a manner as possible.
If we can muster enough help with the translations it will help
to greatly expedite things.

Your assistance is appreciated.

Regards,

John Velez











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                          Secrecy News -- 01/11/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:54:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:57:57 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/11/02

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 5
January 11, 2002


**      BUSH REBUFFS CONGRESS ON SAPS, DECLASSIFICATION
**      CLASSIFIED LEAKS HAVE "DROPPED CONSIDERABLY"
**      NUREMBERG DOCUMENTS ONLINE


BUSH REBUFFS CONGRESS ON SAPS, DECLASSIFICATION

President Bush went out of his way to advise Congress that he
holds predominant authority over the establishment of classified
programs as well as the declassification of information when he
signed two pieces of legislation on January 10.

The President took exception to a boilerplate provision in the
Defense Appropriations Act which said that highly classified
special access programs (SAPs) should not be initiated until 30
days after Congress is notified of their establishment.  He
brusquely rejected this restriction.

"The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that the President's
authority to classify and control access to information bearing
on national security flows from the Constitution and does not
depend upon a legislative grant of authority," the President
wrote.

"The executive branch shall construe [this provision] in a
manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the
President," he wrote.

See the signing statement on the Defense Appropriations Act
here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/gwb011002b.html

In a separate action, the President singled out a measure in the
Foreign Operations Act that calls for the expeditious
declassification of information concerning the murders of
American churchwomen and others in El Salvador and Guatemala.

The President said he will implement this provision "in a manner
consistent with my constitutional and statutory responsibilities
to protect various kinds of sensitive information."

See the signing statement on the Foreign Operations Act here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/gwb011002.html


CLASSIFIED LEAKS HAVE "DROPPED CONSIDERABLY"

In recent months, "The leaking of classified information ... has
dropped considerably," said Assistant Secretary of Defense
Victoria Clarke.

"That is because Secretary Rumsfeld has made it a personal
campaign that he would reduce the amount of leaking of
classified information by people in government and he would
reduce the amount of inappropriate backgrounding of classified
information," she said.

This is a significant observation because it means that new laws
are not needed to combat leaks of classified information and
that such leaks can be effectively controlled without them.

Ms. Clarke spoke at a Brookings Institution forum on Press
Coverage and the War on Terrorism on January 9.  Her remarks are
excerpted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/press.html

Despite the various steps the Pentagon has taken to curtail
unofficial public access to both classified and unclassified
information, such measures can never be completely successful.

Here, for example, is a December 9 Pentagon "Program Budget
Decision" obtained by Secrecy News that "addresses the
development and procurement of missile defense systems" and that
is marked "For Official Use Only" (1.2 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/pbd224.pdf

Though unclassified, the document warns fiercely on every page
that "unauthorized release of this program budget decision is
prohibited."


NUREMBERG DOCUMENTS ONLINE

The Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion has announced the online
publication of documents from the Nuremberg Tribunal in which
Nazi officials were tried following World War II.

The documents come from the archive of General William J.
Donovan, who served, among other things, as special assistant to
the U.S. chief of counsel during the International Military
Tribunal at Nuremberg.

See The Nuremberg Project of the Rutgers Journal of Law and
Religion here:

http://camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/nuremberg.htm


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message: subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                 Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:33:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:01:39 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Maccabee


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark
 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600

 >>Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >>1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >>screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >>Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >>stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >>agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >>people at the private White House screening.

 >>Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >>Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >>Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >>the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >>know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >>of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >>Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.>

 >I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
 >this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
 >like one.

 >Jerry Clark

The core of the above is what I was told by Jamie Shandara away
back in the early 1980's (don't recall the year). Shandara said
he had been working for Spielberg way back then and heard
Spielberg tell the story of the White House screening of ET.

It was after hearing this that the Fund for UFO Research made an
approach to Spielberg through Shandara. The word we got back
from Spielberg through Shandara was that he wouldn't provide us
funding because "he couldn't get into anything controverisial"
or words to that effect.

So, at a time when he was raking in about $3 mill per day from
ET he couldn't spare us a dime!


Note: This was pre-MJ12.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 11

                       Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 11 Jan 2002 17:13:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:13:50 -0500
Subject: Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate

On the Whispers UFO board James Oberg has just posted:

---

"Out There" with Dan Aykroyd


Just finished taping a segment with Dan Aykroyd and his studio
guest Steven  Greer, for the Sci Fi channel series 'Out There',
to air later in the spring. Look forward to fireworks.

---

See:

http://junjun.com/cgi-bin/boards/whispers/config.pl?read=25809


In Response To: "Out There" with Dan Aykroyd (jimo), I posted:

So, that's where you were. I was about to post that the
intellectual terrorist was now "on the run."

It appears that you have chickened out on my question. Just in
case you misplaced it, the question is:

"Getting back to Marciagate, which you have so skillfully
avoided. When did you talk to Marcia Smith about Danny Sheehan's
story  that Marcia Smith's claimed  President Carter was denied
access to UFOs by then DCI George Bush. Also, what did she say
about gaining access to classified Blue Book files for Daniel
Sheehan to review? What did Marcia Smith tell you?"

You start answering that question, and we will have the
beginning of a fireworks display worth watching.


Grant Cameron


Presenting the inside story of how the U.S. Presidents have
handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.com
Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 07:28:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 07:28:49 -0500
Subject: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs




Date: 02-05-94 (08:51) Number: 40882 of 41078 (Refer# NONE)
   To: ALL
From: DON ALLEN
Subj: Apollo Astronauts and UFO

  * Forwarded from "INFO.PARANET"
  * Originally by John Stepkowski
  * Originally to All
  * Originally dated 3 Feb 1994, 20:03

From: legion@werple.apana.org.au (John Stepkowski)
Date: 3 Feb 94 19:07:59 GMT
Organization: werple public-access unix, Melbourne
Message-ID: <2iri2f$if@werple.apana.org.au>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.paranet.skeptic

With the recent discussion of claims that Apollo astronauts saw
"UFOs" on the moon, I thought the following posts might be of
interest....

         =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

  "Moonfive.txt"


To commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon
landing on July 20, 1969, The "Oprah Winfrey" show invited five
Apollo astronauts into an open-studio forum to talk about their
moon experiences, both during the mission and afterwards.

What they had to say about their missions, UFOs and extra-
terrestrials in general is worth repeating, particularly in
light of the  many "stories" attributed to the Apollo
astronauts.

The astronauts taking part were:

Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin: Apollo 11 mission. Touchdown: Sea of
Tranquility, July 20, 1969.  The second man on the moon.

Alan 'Al' Bean: Apollo 12. Touchdown: Ocean of Storms, November
19, 1969.

Edgar 'Ed' Mitchell: Apollo 14. Touchdown: Fra Mauro, February
5, 1971.

James 'Jim' Irwin: Apollo 15. Touchdown: Hadley Rille, July 30,
1971.

Charles Duke: Apollo 16. Touchdown: Descartes Highlands, April
21, 1972.

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


OPRAH:
      Ed, did going to the moon increase your feelings
      about psychic phenomena?

MITCHELL:
       Mmmm, no, not really.


OPRAH:
       No, you always believed it...

MITCHELL:
       Put it into different terms.  Those are old, old
       words, by the way.  Let's use the word "intuition..."

OPRAH:
       Okay.

MITCHELL
       ...And how does information flow.  And yeah, I became very
       interested in that at that point.

OPRAH:
       Yeah.  I'm an intuitive-based person.  I do everything based
       on intuition.  Do you too?

MITCHELL:
       No. I'm a more linear thinker, I've had to develop
       the intuition...

OPRAH:
       Not me, I don't go for the linear too much...

MITCHELL:
       (laughs) ...It's to learn how to get the balance, to get both
       of them; but the point of the investigations of the things
       I've been interested in; we know how our five senses work, but
       you're an intuitive person, most everybody's intuitive to a
       greater or lesser extent.  Where does that information come
       from?  Where does intuitive information come from?

OPRAH:
       Uh-huh.  Where do you think it comes from?

MITCHELL:
       Well, we're starting to understand some "models" for
       it.  Jung called it the "collective unconscious", there's
       information out here.  It's kind of like a field and we just
       kind of tune into it and there it is.  At least that is what
       the modern thinking is.


OPRAH:
       When you were "out there", did you sense that there
       were other "beings" -- not necessarily human -- also "out
       there"?  James...?


IRWIN:
       I never sensed anything out at the moon or even beyond
       the moon. I don't know (why) I get that question a lot,
       because they think now we're experts on extra-terrestrial
       life, but I say I don't think there's extra-terrestrial life
       anywhere.  I think the Earth is the only place where there's
       life.


OPRAH:
       You still think that?


IRWIN:
       I still believe that.


OPRAH:
       You all think that?


MITCHELL:
       No, I disagree completely.


OPRAH:
       You don't think that, Ed?


MITCHELL:
       No, I think  the universe is so magnificent and so huge, and,
       uh, there is an intelligence base in the universe. And I can't
       conceive of this being the only planet in the universe with
       intelligent life...


OPRAH:
       Intelligent life...


MITCHELL:
       ...I think that there's intelligent life throughout the
       universe, we just haven't discovered it yet.


OPRAH:
       My intuition tells me that too, Ed.  Buzz, what do you say?


ALDRIN:
       Ed may feel a little bit more certain about that.  I'm not
       sure what's going to happen. It certainly looks as though the
       odds are that there are a lot more opportunities out there than
       we thought before, and I'd be very surprised -- and it may
       even happen in our life time -- that we may find out some
       evidence of intelligence and it will come because of a
       furthering of the space program.


OPRAH:
       All right.  Alan...


BEAN:
       Well I think there's probably life out there. But someone
       said, or computed, that the number of bodies in the universe
       are about as dense as two chipmunks in all of North America.
       And so for us to go and find --  let's say we're one of the
       chipmunks and we're trying to find one of the others in all of
       North America -- it's going to be hard to do.


ALDRIN:
       Tough job...


BEAN:
       So, I believe they're out there too, but we're not going to
       find them any time soon, and we may never find them, because
       of just the fact that they're so far, far apart.  If we look
       at all the stars out there, there's probably planets around
       them, but which one do we go to?  And if we go to that one,
       even the nearest one takes four and a half years, come back in
       nine...


ALDRIN:
       At the speed of light...


BEAN:
       That's right. Then go to the next one, takes another fifty
       years, out and back...


OPRAH:
       Yeah, I'm not THAT interested...


BEAN:
       So it's going to be a tough job...


OPRAH:
       ...I've got things to do here.


BEAN:
       ...It'd be better if they came here.


ALDRIN:
       Yeah, it'd be better if they came here.


OPRAH:
       That's how I feel about it. Charles?


DUKE:
       I didn't sense any life out in space, personally.


OPRAH:
       Never saw anybody..?


DUKE:
       Never saw anybody, no UFOs, nothing like that. But I agree
       with Jim.  I think that we are -- human life -- is unique in
       the universe, and I think that's here on Earth. I believe in
       spiritual life.  The scripture does talk about Heaven and Hell
       and spiritual life, life after death, but it doesn't refer to
       anything out in space.  So I agree with Jim.


       [At this point, questions were taken from the audience. A
       nervous young man asked the following question:- ]


MAN:
       Um yes. Do you feel that the Government hides anything from
       us?  For example, you see all these stories about people that
       say they've been abducted and raped -- women that've been
       raped -- and they say that it's a real factual story and that
       tons of people have seen it...


OPRAH:
       By ETs?  What paper was this is in?


MAN:
       Did you see that show (where) they said the lights were coming
       down and the police were out watching...?  Do you think that
       the Government hides any of that?


DUKE:
       No, I don't.  Not in NASA.  We were completely open.  We
       couldn't even have a private conversation without it being
       blasted out to the world.  I remember John (Young) and I were
       talking and we had a problem with, uh, our microphone stuck
       open and he was cussing and it went out to everybody.  No
       bleeps!


OPRAH:
       Ed, what do you say, you're shaking your head?


MITCHELL:
       Well, I agree with what Charlie is saying about the NASA
       program  -- there was nothing at all hidden in that -- but I
       do believe that there's a lot more known about, uh,
       extra-terrestrial investigation than is available to the
       public right now; has been for a long time.


OPRAH:
       And why do you think it's kept from the public?


MITCHELL:
       Oh well, that's a long, long story. It goes back to World
       War II when all of that happened, and highly classified stuff.


ALDRIN:
       It makes for great book-selling...


MITCHELL:
       Yeah...


IRWIN:
       And newspapers, too.


Don

--- FMail 0.96=E2
  * Origin: It's only a hobby..it's only a hobby..it's only... (1:3623/18)
<<<>>>








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                      NASA & Gravity-Powered Spaceships

From: SMiles Lewis <smiles@elfis.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 10:58:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:12:58 -0500
Subject: NASA & Gravity-Powered Spaceships


New Scientist Newsletter 12 January 2002

GOING UP

Can we wave goodbye to rockets and the internal combustion
engine? Is it time to say hello to energy- saving,
gravity-powered spaceships, aeroplanes, cars, elevators - and a
whole new branch of theoretical physics? Or has NASA been led on
a wild goose chase costing $600,000?

In 1992 Evgeny Podkletnov published a paper describing how he
had stumbled upon a "gravity shielding" effect while running a
routine test on one of his superconductors.

Two years ago NASA paid Superconductive Components of Columbus,
Ohio to build a copy of Podkletnov's 'gravity shielding' device,
and later this month the machine will arrive at the Marshall
Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. If the experiment
fails, that will be the end of the matter. But if it succeeds,
it could change our way of interacting with a fundamental force
of nature. And that, New Scientist discovers, would change
everything.

Read the full feature in this week's print edition









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:50:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:16:45 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


Former Soviet cosmonauts have already acknowledged seeing UFOs
while in space. Maybe it's just a coincidence that no U.S.
astronauts like the ones on the Oprah show have, but maybe not.

The comments made by Paul Hill, at one time a high-ranking NASA
scientist, give some basis to suspect that astronauts cannot be
entirely forthcoming on any UFO encounters they might have had.
In his book, _Unconventional Flying Objects_, Hill says he was
told by his superior at NACA (the forerunner of NASA) that:

"my name could not be used in connection with a sighting or in
any way that would implicate NACA with these objects [UFOs]."

Hill had personally been a witness to a UFO seen by others, and
used the reports from different locations to triangulate the
object's size, speed, and acceleration.

So even the astronauts on record as stating they think UFOs are
extraterrestrial craft but never saw any themselves while in
space may not be telling everything they know. NASA's policy may
still be that UFOs do not exist, as Hill put it.

Hill's book wasn't published until after his death, apparently
because Hill wanted it that way.  Perhaps there will be similar
posthumous revelations from some of the astronauts.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                              Kinross Incident?

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:56:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:18:39 -0500
Subject: Kinross Incident?



Hi Errol,

I wonder if you would post this question to the list?

Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the great
lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
[GCI] radar.

If, as has been suggested, that hydrate gases-released during
sub-sea geological subsidences- might be the reason for some
aircraft and ship disappearances in the "Bermuda Triangle",
perhaps the same has occurred over Lake Michigan. If an aircraft
could be seen merging with the gas bubble, both would likely
disappear in the inevitable explosion. Surely hot jet exhaust
gases and methane would not tolerate one another. It would take
a second or two before the gas choked off the air being sucked
through the turbine mixing it in the hot combustion chamber. I
don't think there would even be time for the compressor to begin
to stall before the methane ignited.

At the very least [and depending on the breadth of the bubble]
the F-89C would lose  flight control and wing lift effectiveness
in the less dense gas invironment until it either tore through
the bubble or tumbled out of control out of the bottom.

Perhaps though there was no bottom as/if the gas bubbled up out
of the lake. The GCI team had directed the jet from 25 grand
down to 7,000 feet. Since the GCI radar seems to suggest to
researchers that either the F-89C was drawn in by the "bogie",
somehow collided with it or flew behind or between the CGI radar
and the bogie, and seemed to merge with it, then if indeed this
gas was visible to radar, it likely would not have been to the
pilot of the F-89C. I can't confirm that there was radar in the
F-89C [believe that came about in the D model]. The nose cone
had cannon in it.

Any takers?

Thanks,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:46:04 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 07:28:49 -0500
 >>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:50:50 -0600
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >Former Soviet cosmonauts have already acknowledged seeing UFOs
 >while in space. Maybe it's just a coincidence that no U.S.
 >astronauts like the ones on the Oprah show have, but maybe not.

 >The comments made by Paul Hill, at one time a high-ranking NASA
 >scientist, give some basis to suspect that astronauts cannot be
 >entirely forthcoming on any UFO encounters they might have had.
 >In his book, _Unconventional Flying Objects_, Hill says he was
 >told by his superior at NACA (the forerunner of NASA) that:

 >"my name could not be used in connection with a sighting or in
 >any way that would implicate NACA with these objects [UFOs]."

 >Hill had personally been a witness to a UFO seen by others, and
 >used the reports from different locations to triangulate the
 >object's size, speed, and acceleration.

 >So even the astronauts on record as stating they think UFOs are
 >extraterrestrial craft but never saw any themselves while in
 >space may not be telling everything they know. NASA's policy may
 >still be that UFOs do not exist, as Hill put it.

 >Hill's book wasn't published until after his death, apparently
 >because Hill wanted it that way. Perhaps there will be similar
 >posthumous revelations from some of the astronauts.


Hi Alfred,

Dr. Richard Haines retired from NASA-Ames as chief research
scientist. His NARCAP reflects his ongoing interest in the
phenomenon. I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                Re: Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:23:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:48:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate - Maccabee


 >Date: 11 Jan 2002 17:13:51 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Whispers: Oberg & Greer Debate

 >On the Whispers UFO board James Oberg has just posted:

---

 >'Out There' with Dan Aykroyd


 >Just finished taping a segment with Dan Aykroyd and his studio
 >guest Steven  Greer, for the Sci Fi channel series 'Out There',
 >to air later in the spring. Look forward to fireworks.


I was just informed today that the Akroyd show has been
"delayed". So we will have to wait for the "fireworks."









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:28:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:51:09 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Goldstein


 >Date: 10 Jan 2002 13:59:19 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Clark
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:03:44 -0600

 >>>>Date: 9 Jan 2002 17:16:18 -0800
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>>>Subject: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>>Consider, for example the following historical case. On June 27,
 >>>>1982, President Ronald Reagan invited 36 people to take part in a
 >>>>screening of the movie "ET: The Extraterrestrial." The Steven
 >>>>Spielberg movie dealt with a young extraterrestrial who becomes
 >>>>stranded on earth and struggles to return, while U.S. government
 >>>>agents try to capture him. Spielberg himself was on of the
 >>>>people at the private White House screening.

 >>>>Spielberg sat right beside President Reagan during the showing.
 >>>>Following the screening, the President leaned over, clapped
 >>>>Spielberg on the shoulder, and quietly commented something to
 >>>>the effect, "You know, there aren't six people in this room who
 >>>>know how true this really is." Unfortunately, the sudden press
 >>>>of people approaching Spielberg and the President prevented
 >>>>Spielberg from pursuing the strange comment made by Reagan.

 >>>I would bet the ranch, or at least my acre or two of it, that
 >>>this is an urban legend. It certainly looks, sounds, and smells
 >>>like one.

 >>Hi Jerry, All,

 >>Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this story?
 >>I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an e-mail address
 >>for either Spielberg's offices or Dreamworks, I drew a blank on
 >>both. If anyone has a contact address we could simply put the
 >>question to him and then see if he chooses to respond.

 >>After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried to
 >>confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

 >I wrote to Spielberg in January 1988 to confirm the story, but
 >the letter was cut off by Spielberg's publicity coordinator Kris
 >Kelley who stated "unfortunately, Mr. Spielberg is currently
 >away working on his next project and is unable to personally
 >answer your question." Another researcher, Linda Howe who worked
 >as a documentary film producer and author, also tried to
 >interview Spielberg about his Reagan encounter without success.

 >Florida Today reporter Billy Cox also made an attempt to confirm
 >the Spielberg story. He phoned Spielberg and ended up talking
 >with Spielberg publicist Marvin Levy. Levy stated that "Mr.
 >Spielberg does not wish to discuss any private conversation held
 >with the President."

 >The story was told to Jamie Shandera while with Spielberg in
 >Japan. I am sure Stanton Friedman would have some insight into
 >this story. Billy Cox, as I recall, also talked to Shandera.


Hi Grant,

To me, if this story started with Jamie Shandera I would
consider him a dubious source. After Bill Moore's work with
AFOSI, the MJ-12 documents, and Jamie Shandera being Moore's
sidekick, I would listen to anything either of them says with a
large grain of salt regarding credibility. Unless truth comes
from Spielberg, it is nothing more than another UFO story
bouncing from loose lips.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 12

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:51:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800


 >Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

 >http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

 >Had a nice long fonecon [phone conversation] this afternoon with
 >Irving Newton, 78, of San Antonio, TX, the Ramey weatherman and
 >Roswell debris "identifier." He seemed pleased to hear from me
 >(we never had talked before) and was quite open and eager to
 >talk.

Ed, List, All -

In my conversations and correspondence with Irving Newton, I
have always found him cooperative, cordial and friendly. He is
eager to talk about his involvement in the Roswell case.

 >He has quite a collection of Roswell memorabilia and offered to
 >"lay it all out" if I will come to San Antonio to visit with
 >him. He has several copies -- but no negatives or originals --
 >of the photo of him in General Ramey's office. He has no idea
 >who took the photo. He confirmed most of the stories told about
 >him in the Roswell accounts, with a few notable exceptions:

 >He was the only weatherman on duty in air operations on
 >the late afternoon of July 8, 1947. They ran a 24 hour shop
 >and a weatherman was supposed to be in air operations at
 >all times.

 >He was summoned to Ramey's office first by Col. Dubose and then
 >personally by Gen. Ramey. He supports accounts of harsh language
 >from Ramey ordering him to Ramey's office. He thinks he arrived
 >at Ramey's office -- just a few blocks from air operations --
 >between 4:30 and 5 p.m. (That must have been only a short time
 >after I had finished taking my fotos and departed Ramey's
 >office.)

I think this is the first time that he identified the colonel
specifically. When I spoke with him, he just suggested that he
was met by a colonel who told him that they had some debris from
Roswell that most thought was a flying saucer but that the
general thought was a weather balloon. He, the general, wanted
Irving to identify it. (Moore and Berlitz suggested that Ramey,
though the colonel, was telling Newton to identify whatever he
saw as a  weather balloon but I think the colonel was just
giving Newton the facts of the situation and expected him to
identify the material, or rather, confirm, Ramey's analysis. I
don't think he was being ordered to identify it as anything
specific. He was supposed to look at it and then tell the
general what he thought it was.)

 >Newton was met and briefed by COL. Dubose who told him upon his
 >arrival at Ramey's office that the General was uncertain whether
 >this was a flying saucer and maybe it was a weather device, and
 >he wanted Newton to take a look. Newton said he took one look at
 >the debris spread out on the carpet and said "If that is not a
 >Rawin device I will eat it!"

 >Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
 >office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

The point is that he would not know, for certain, that it is
what Marcel brought from Roswell because he wasn't there when
the material arrived. This point, however, is important to Dr.
Johnson who makes the claim that some of the real debris was in
among the bits of the weather balloon debris.

 >He says he has said this over and over for years to
 >interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
 >ignored his statements.

This is blatant "Bondism". I have accurately reported exactly
what Newton told me and I have the tapes to back it up. I have
letters in which I have asked him for clarification of his
report and I have reported on that as well. There is nowhere
that I have ignored his statements, Dr. Johnson's allegation to
the contrary.

 >Newton seems to remember a few people in the office "taking
 >notes". He assumed them to be reporters. He was not too clear on
 >that point. It was not an especially momentous event for him. He
 >said that Major Marcel was there and followed him around the
 >office trying to get him to look at "some of the sticks" he was
 >holding and to see the strange symbols on them that Marcel
 >thought were "not of this world." He does recall seeing strange
 >random figures on some of these sticks.

Newton told me, and I believe it to be an important point, he
did not know Marcel and was introduced to none of the men in the
room he did not know. In other words, Newton has assumed that
the man asking the questions was Major Marcel, but Marcel has
said that he was ordered by Ramey not to open his mouth.
Therefore, Marcel was not the major asking the questions and
that officer was more than likely Major Charles A. Cashon,
Ramey's public affairs officer. (Newton didn't know him either.)

And interestingly, Dr. Johnson has claimed that he was the only
reporter to go to Ramey's office and speak with him, newspaper
reports and other evidence to the contrary. Colonel DuBose
(later brigadier general) said that there were four or five
reporters in the room asking questions. Since DuBose would have
known the officers present, all of whom would have been in
uniform and thereby identifying themselves as officers, those
DuBose thought were reporters were in civilian clothes and
unknown to him. Given the circumstances, it's clear that these
men were reporters, some of whom worked for radio stations. Dr.
Johnson has confirmed for us that other reporters did, in fact,
interview General Ramey, contrary to what Dr. Johnson now
claims.

Finally we have this last little bit of invention in an attempt
to confirm that some "real" debris was in the room. In no other
interviews had Newton ever suggested he remembered strange
figures on the balloon.

 >This all follows closely several accounts that I have read about
 >Newton and his visit to Ramey's office. But there are mysteries
 >here: why was Marcel's hat and tie gone from the radiator in the
 >Newton foto?

We don't know that these items were Marcel's. It is more likely
that these were Ramey's and removed for no nefarious purpose
other than to remove some clutter from the office.

 >Would the major have gotten into uniform to talk
 >with a warrant officer when he didn't for a media photographer?

Maybe Marcel didn't care. Maybe he didn't expect to meet with a
newspaper photographer. Maybe he didn't have a tie and didn't
put it on at all, so these assumptions by Dr. Johnson are
invalid.

This is not to mention that I find it difficult to believe that
a major would walk into a general's office and toss his hat and
tie onto the radiator. If Marcel had removed his tie, he would
have stuffed it into his pocket and since the hat is soft cloth
and relatively small, he could have done the same thing with it.
Military protocol suggests that Marcel keep his personal items
grouped together and not tossed around the office.

 >And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >the Ramey/Dubose photos?

This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
photographs were shot and nothing more.

 >In the days following, Newton received many phone calls and
 >letters from other AAF weathermen who had a variety of comments
 >for him, but not from the press at that time.

Of course not. The story was dead. The material identified as a
weather balloon and radar target. There was no story. Those
others probably saw Newton's picture in the newspaper and called
to find out what was going on.

 >At a later time he was interviewed by Life Magazine and other
 >magazines and a TV company interviewed him on camera in his
 >home, etc.

 >He and his wife were flown to Roswell in July 1996 for him to
 >make a speech to tell his story. It was in an auditorium and
 >there was an admission charged. He described his experiences of
 >July 8, 1947, and told the audience that the debris in Ramey's
 >office was the "real stuff" that Marcel had brought from
 >Roswell, but that several of the reporters simply ignored his
 >statements in this regard. The inquiries have been few and far
 >between recently and he was not invited to attend the last two
 >Roswell anniversary bashes.

 >Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
 >actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson. Marcel recalls his father
 >telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
 >was the "real stuff." Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
 >on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
 >brought from Roswell. Johnson, after carefully and at length
 >interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
 >Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
 >unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
 >"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
 >have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!


 >--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

In other words, Jesse Marcel, Jr. never claimed his father told
him that some of the stuff in the photographs was the real
stuff. This is pure invention by Dr. Johnson and fits in his
continuing manipulation of the data to support his various
fantasies.

Dr. Johnson, at no point, interviewed me. I interviewed him. The
story he told me originally is in direct convict with that he
tells today. As just a single example, he told me that he was
told, by General Ramey, that the material in his office was part
of a weather balloon. Today, Dr. Johnson denies he said this,
even after hearing himself, on tape, make just that statement.
The only pure fabrications we have are claims by Dr. Johnson
that begin with the fact he unwrapped the debris, to the story
that he handed General Ramey the note in his hand (which, if
true, certainly negates the work of those trying to understand
it), that General Ramey didn't know  what was in his office, and
his continued attacks on those of us with whom he disagrees.

I'll make one other comment here. In the last year two members
of Dr. Johnson's RPIT have asked for copies of my taped
interviews and the correspondence I had with Dr. Johnson. They
wanted, I suppose, to review the data, especially since Dr.
Johnson and I seemed to be at such odds. They could listen to
the tapes, hear Dr. Johnson make the statements that he claimed
he never made, and they could read the letters that suggested I
wanted to resolve the differences and the lack of candor on Dr.
Johnson's part. I went to the time and expense of making the
copies and paying for the postage. All that I asked was that
they make some comment on the material, not necessarily in a
public forum. Since then I have heard nothing from either of
them. They have had the material for many months, have had
adequate time to review the material and even to discuss it with
Dr. Johnson, but they have done nothing about any of this. Had I
been wrong or misrepresented the material, you can be sure that
we would all have been hearing about it. The silence is
deafening and I think supportive of my position. Dr. Johnson's
first interviews, with me, reflect the reality of the situation
on July 8, 1947, and his later tales smack of confabulation and
wishful thinking.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:37:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

 >Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

 >http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

 >Had a nice long fonecon [phone conversation] this afternoon with
 >Irving Newton, 78, of San Antonio, TX, the Ramey weatherman and
 >Roswell debris "identifier." He seemed pleased to hear from me
 >(we never had talked before) and was quite open and eager to
 >talk.

I had a 2 hour phone conversations with Newton in April, 2000,
just as he was turning 80.

 >He has quite a collection of Roswell memorabilia and offered to
 >"lay it all out" if I will come to San Antonio to visit with
 >him. He has several copies - but no negatives or originals -
 >of the photo of him in General Ramey's office. He has no idea
 >who took the photo. He confirmed most of the stories told about
 >him in the Roswell accounts, with a few notable exceptions:

He also told me he had no idea who took his photo, but claimed
he remembered having it taken. He couldn't recall if the
photographer was military or civilian.

 >He was the only weatherman on duty in air operations on
 >the late afternoon of July 8, 1947. They ran a 24 hour shop
 >and a weatherman was supposed to be in air operations at
 >all times.

OK. One interesting part of Newton's story was how he was
ordered off his post by Gen. Ramey over Newton's vociferous
protest, since they were directing regional air traffic in the
joint weather/air operations officer and he was in charge. Ramey
had been telling the press earlier that he thought it a weather
balloon and would bring in a weather officer for positive
identification. Thus it was obviously very important for Ramey
to make the weather balloon ID official, to the point that he
was willing to compromise air traffic control to do it.

 >He was summoned to Ramey's office first by Col. Dubose and then
 >personally by Gen. Ramey.

When I asked him if he knew who called him the first time, he
said "No idea." When I asked if it might have been Col. Dubose,
he said, "Could have been." I don't recall any other interview
where Newton said he knew who first called him on the telephone.

 >He supports accounts of harsh language
 >from Ramey ordering him to Ramey's office. He thinks he arrived
 >at Ramey's office -- just a few blocks from air operations --
 >between 4:30 and 5 p.m. (That must have been only a short time
 >after I had finished taking my fotos and departed Ramey's
 >office.)

He also recalled being 3 or 4 blocks from Ramey's office. He
didn't have any idea when he arrived there, only that it was
still light out and he recalled it being the afternoon. His wife
in the background apparently interrupted him, and "hollered" at
him "that it was in late afternoon or early evening." When I
asked why she thought that, she apparently told him that he was
on "shift work" at the time and worked until 11:00.

I spent a fair amount of time trying to get a fix on the time,
but he really didn't remember. He certainly couldn't pin it down
to between 4:30 and 5:00, which would have been way too early,
since the press release didn't even hit the wires in Fort Worth
until around 4:30 CDT.

I suggested between 6:00 and 6:30, and he said that could be
right (but again, didn't know).

 >Newton was met and briefed by COL. Dubose

Again, this is way more precise than what Newton told me and
others. He remembers being briefed by some colonel or lt.
colonel, not specifically Dubose. He didn't apparently know who
Dubose was and has no specific memory of him being there. He
remembers Gen. Ramey, and claims to have had a rather dubious
encounter with Marcel. He told me he didn't remember
specifically anybody else in Ramey's office.

 >who told him upon his
 >arrival at Ramey's office that the General was uncertain whether
 >this was a flying saucer and maybe it was a weather device, and
 >he wanted Newton to take a look. Newton said he took one look at
 >the debris spread out on the carpet and said "If that is not a
 >Rawin device I will eat it!"

 >Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
 >office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

Total nonsense!

Newton's statement as to whether it was a Rawin device, or radar
target, definitely counts for something, because he was a
weatherman and he is commenting on something he witnessed. But
Newton's opinion as to where it came from counts for nothing,
since there is no way he could personally know.

It was _impossible_ for Newton to know whether this is what
Marcel brought from Roswell, unless Newton personally
accompanied Marcel from Roswell and watched as Marcel's package
was opened.

 >He says he has said this over and over for years to
 >interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
 >ignored his statements.

Why shouldn't they? His statement is pure hearsay. It's his
_opinion_, not personal knowledge.

And make no mistake about it - Newton is an almost fanatical
Roswell skeptic. From his standpoint, all he ever saw was a
radar target, and he _assumes_ that this _must_ be what was
found. He refuses to entertain even the possibility that he and
others could have been part of a shell game.

Here's a typical Newton statement: "Until someone can bring me
pictures of them substituting this or anything else, I know damn
well that they're just trying to cook up stories."

 >Newton seems to remember a few people in the office "taking
 >notes". He assumed them to be reporters. He was not too clear on
 >that point. It was not an especially momentous event for him.

He told me he definitely remembered a few reporters being there,
as he has told others. This looks like J.B. Johnson trying to
spin the story again about him being the only reporter ever
admitted to Ramey's office.

 >He
 >said that Major Marcel was there and followed him around the
 >office trying to get him to look at "some of the sticks" he was
 >holding and to see the strange symbols on them that Marcel
 >thought were "not of this world." He does recall seeing strange
 >random figures on some of these sticks.

Heck, when I asked him about the people he worked with on a
daily basis, he told me he couldn't remember a single one. He
couldn't remember any names or furnish any descriptions.

But he has this remarkable memory of a momentary encounter with
Marcel following him around and making a fool of himself in
front of Gen. Ramey and reporters no less.

In reality, the Associated Press news stories attributed a
mundane weather balloon identification to Marcel. Ramey was
praising Marcel a year later, calling his service to his command
"outstanding", protesting his transfer, and expressing his
opinion that Marcel was command officer material.

None of this squares with Newton's account. Either he made it up
in later interviews because he loves to ridicule Marcel and the
Roswell story, or it is embellished memory of probably having
questions directed to him by another Major in the room, namely
Major Charles Cashon, Ramey's public information officer. This
is according to Col. Dubose, who said Cashon was there and
handling some of the questioning.

Newton didn't know either man and could have been confused. When
I put this scenario to him, he again refused to even entertain
the possibility. He said Dubose was dead and he wasn't, and
because he was still alive, that somehow made him more credible.

Furthermore, when I questioned Newton closely about his 1994 AF
affidavit where he twice claimed that Marcel was trying to
convince him of "alien writing" on the sticks, he backed off and
said that Marcel never used those words. Maybe the word was more
like "foreign".

People should keep in mind that everybody who has interviewed
Newton comes away realizing that he considers Roswell to be
complete bunk, and he loves to ridicule it ("It's all a bunch of
horse pucky", he told me about a dozen times). He is also
obviously very familiar with the debunking literature. This
affects very much how he answers some of the questions.

When the topics were more neutral and he wasn't in his knee-jerk
Roswell debunking mode, he was much more thoughtful and careful
about his statements, and tried to make it clear he generally
had only vague memories of events. An example of this was when
he was trying to recall the time when Ramey called him into his
office.

 >This all follows closely several accounts that I have read about
 >Newton and his visit to Ramey's office. But there are mysteries
 >here: why was Marcel's hat and tie gone from the radiator in the
 >Newton foto? Would the major have gotten into uniform to talk
 >with a warrant officer when he didn't for a media photographer?
 >And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >the Ramey/Dubose photos?

Minor points at best. A junior officer throwing his clothes
around the General's office - come on!

 >In the days following, Newton received many phone calls and
 >letters from other AAF weathermen who had a variety of comments
 >for him, but not from the press at that time.

This is news to me. He said he went back to work and forgot all
about it, though sometimes co-workers would bring it up years
later.

 >At a later time he was interviewed by Life Magazine and other
 >magazines and a TV company interviewed him on camera in his
 >home, etc.

 >He and his wife were flown to Roswell in July 1996 for him to
 >make a speech to tell his story. It was in an auditorium and
 >there was an admission charged. He described his experiences of
 >July 8, 1947, and told the audience that the debris in Ramey's
 >office was the "real stuff" that Marcel had brought from
 >Roswell, but that several of the reporters simply ignored his
 >statements in this regard.

Because they are worthless. He wasn't in Ramey's inner circle
and had no personal knowledge of where the debris came from. At
best, all he can tell us is what he was told.

 >The inquiries have been few and far
 >between recently and he was not invited to attend the last two
 >Roswell anniversary bashes.

 >Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
 >actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson.

There are certainly more than 3 people still living, e.g. Bill
Brazel, Jr. and Loretta Porter to name but two.

 >Marcel recalls his father
 >telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
 >was the "real stuff."

Nobody but J. Bond Johnson has ever heard Marcel Jr. recalling
his father saying that at least part of the debris was the "real
stuff". In fact, Marcel Jr. has made statements that while there
was some superficial resemblance to the real debris, this was
not the real debris and that his father said the Fort Worth
photos were staged.

 >Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
 >on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
 >brought from Roswell.

Again, this is absolutely no way for Newton to be "dead certain"
that this was real stuff. He wasn't on the debris field or in
Roswell. All he knows is what he was shown and told in Ramey's
office, that's all.

 >Johnson, after carefully and at length
 >interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
 >Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
 >unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
 >"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
 >have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!

 >--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

Just the usual nonsense from Johnson, trying to spin the story
that he was the photographer who photographed the 'real' Roswell
material.

Eyewitnesses who were there stating that the debris was swapped
were Jesse Marcel and Col. Dubose. Recently, Wendy Connors did a
videotaped interview with Walter Haut. According to Connors,
Haut stated that Ramey had flown to Roswell earlier, and told
senior staff that they were going to use a weather balloon as a
cover story.

Contemporary news stories _document_ that Ramey was putting out
a weather balloon and radar target story before the photos were
taken and before Newton was called into Ramey's office. These
stories include two the next morning from Johnson's own
newspaper, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. There it was stated
that both Ramey and Dubose thought it a weather balloon from the
first moment and the weather officer (Newton) brought in later
merely confirmed this.

Finally, Ramey's teletype message, held in his hand while
Johnson was taking pictures, states that the next sent out press
release was going to be about weather balloons. The fix was in
before Newton ever arrived on the scene. He was brought in
strictly for show at the very end.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 20:32:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:42:01 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
 >to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
 >reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
 >macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
 >stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.


I rather suspect Aldrin's comments are sincere and accurate, and
that he's telling the truth.

Of course, if you want to belief silly stuff, you have to assume
that anyone providing contrary testimony is a liar.


Jim Oberg










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                  Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 23:29:17 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:44:45 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Gates


 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 18:22:48 -0500
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this
 >>story? I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an
 >>e-mail address for either Spielberg's offices or
 >>Dreamworks, I drew a blank on both. If anyone has a contact
 >>address we could simply put the question to him and then see
 >>if he chooses to respond.

 >>After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried
 >>to confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

 >John;

 >Well, I gave it a whirl last year by sending the following
 >letter off. But as you can imagine, Mr. Spielberg is not an easy
 >man to just pick up a phone and call. By the way, there was
 >absolutely no response to the letter, hmpf!

On one hand the story came from Jamie Shandara whom claimed that
Spielberg whispered into his ear so to speak. On the other hand
Spielberg has chosen not to _deny_ the story even when he has
been given a number of chances over the years by letters and so
forth. If it never happened, Spielberg could easily deny it and
never break any private conversations he had with the President.

Apparently all we have is "Shandara said" and thats all.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                                    Rods!

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 00:23:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:59:26 -0500
Subject: Rods!


OK, you've all heard, perhaps reluctantly, about 'Rods'. Perhaps
you have also heard about base jumpers.

But have you heard of the confluence of these two decidedly
different phenomena?

Can you swallow this?

Rods videotaped during base jumping. Try your hand at
explanation at:

http://brumac.8k.com/BaseJumperRods/BaseJumperRods.html


And, if you'd like, try a jump yourself.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 02:21:49 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 12:25:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy


Hello, all Don.


 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:56:15 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Kinross Incident?

 >Hi Errol,

 >I wonder if you would post this question to the list?

 >Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the great
 >lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >[GCI] radar.

Well, radar is sensitive to certain weather conditions and the
density difference of Methane and regular Atmospheric gases
could make a radar (especially the early types) return, at least
possible.

 >If, as has been suggested, that hydrate gases-released during
 >sub-sea geological subsidences- might be the reason for some
 >aircraft and ship disappearances in the "Bermuda Triangle",
 >perhaps the same has occurred over Lake Michigan. If an aircraft
 >could be seen merging with the gas bubble, both would likely
 >disappear in the inevitable explosion. Surely hot jet exhaust
 >gases and methane would not tolerate one another. It would take
 >a second or two before the gas choked off the air being sucked
 >through the turbine mixing it in the hot combustion chamber. I
 >don't think there would even be time for the compressor to begin
 >to stall before the methane ignited.

 >At the very least [and depending on the breadth of the bubble]
 >the F-89C would lose  flight control and wing lift effectiveness
 >in the less dense gas invironment until it either tore through
 >the bubble or tumbled out of control out of the bottom.

The F-89, a big, heavy, fighter, had the glide ratio of a cook
stove, and was not particularly easy to handle. Also the C model
- A & B - had some structural problems with the wing and tail,
corrected in the F-89D. It was during that time period that
there were a whole bunch of F-89's lost to structural failures -
at least 6 or more. The last F-89C's were out of service by the
mid 50's. The much improved D, H and J's didn't leave service
till the late 60's.

 >Perhaps though there was no bottom as/if the gas bubbled up out
 >of the lake. The GCI team had directed the jet from 25 grand
 >down to 7,000 feet. Since the GCI radar seems to suggest to
 >researchers that either the F-89C was drawn in by the "bogie",
 >somehow collided with it or flew behind or between the CGI radar
 >and the bogie, and seemed to merge with it, then if indeed this
 >gas was visible to radar, it likely would not have been to the
 >pilot of the F-89C. I can't confirm that there was radar in the
 >F-89C [believe that came about in the D model]. The nose cone
 >had cannon in it.


The C had six 2.75 rockets underwing and six 20mm cannon also,
all the F-89's had radar - the D's tip tank rocket pods were a
step on the road to reducing yer average Tu-95 (Bear) to
aluminum chaff. The H's added three GAR Falcons and the number
of 2.75in rockets reduced to 21 per pod from 52 on the D. FYI -
the J had the Falcons and two Genie nukes per plane - now we are
talking, ah... aluminum molocules.

The Allison J-35 jet engine was troublesome, flameouts were
common and too the shedding of parts. I saw an F-89 flameout and
landing at Portland International (Oregon) back in the 60's. So
if gas was encountered it is entirely possible that a whole lot
of factors could have coincided with the F-89's demise.


GT McCoy









                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                  Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident?

From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 12:33:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident?


 >Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >[GCI] radar.

<snip>

It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
cause disaster?






                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                      What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 12:38:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 12:38:07 -0500
Subject: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I



Source: The Toronto Star

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=2ad3feb94
d05b50d&pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1009407848798&ca
ll_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

Dec. 27, 2001. 09:15 AM

Armchair astronaut maps final frontier
Burlington man turns passion for space into books

Bill Taylor
Staff Reporter


OK, so space is the final frontier. But who knew one of the
border crossings would be in the back of a nondescript building
in a little industrial complex just off the QEW? The sort of
place you drive by three times before you find it.

Inside, Robert Godwin is on the moon...

"Cool, isn't it?" he says, turning away for a moment from his
computer screen.

The CD-ROM he's running shows a map of the route of the lunar
rover driven by astronauts David Scott and James Irwin on the
Apollo 15 mission in 1971. Click on a point and suddenly you're
there in the Hadley Rille region. You can turn 360 degrees, zoom
in on the stark hills and valleys, the craters and threatening
shadows of an alien world. And, if the loneliness starts to get
to you, turn back to the rover parked reassuringly nearby.

"This is what they saw," says Godwin. "And look, see? Just over
there. You can barely make it out. The landing module. Did you
know, by the way, that it was designed by a Canadian? Owen
Maynard."

Back on earth, Godwin's company, Apogee Books, has published 18
dauntingly detailed books on American space exploration, with
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's full
co-operation and reprints of the agency's mission reports. The
latest venture delves into the Russian space program. Each comes
with a CD-ROM with hours of video and information.

It all started with rock 'n roll. Godwin, 43, came to Canada in
1978 from northern England. A music enthusiast, he once had "the
largest collection - it was documented - of Led Zeppelin stuff
in the world" and wrote a book about the band.

Godwin's brother Richard works with the Space Frontier
Foundation running 'Watch', an asteroid impact research project.
"There are a lot of these rocks out there with the potential to
hit the Earth and wipe us out."

Through his brother, Godwin found himself at the dinner marking
the 30th anniversary of the Apollo 7 mission, sitting with Buzz
Aldrin, second man on the moon. "My jaw was on the floor. I
didn't say a word."

Not until Aldrin asked if he'd put out a "special book" for some
friends who also had an anniversary coming up.

"I said, 'Apollo 8, right?'" Godwin recalls.

He published 500 copies. When the book was reprinted, "we sold
4,000 in less than a month," he says. "Then I saw an Apollo 11
press kit being sold on eBay for $300. I thought that was
outrageous. This is public domain information."

Then business blasted off. Godwin's office walls are covered
with photos of him with astronauts - "This is me and Wally,"
Walter Schirra, one of the original Mercury 7 crew - and he's
one of the few to get an interview out of Neil Armstrong, first
man on the moon.

The book on the Apollo 11 moon mission was at the printers when
a "junior clerk in Houston" turned up the astronauts'
debriefing. "The whole moon-landing mission, blow by blow, in
their own words. I called the printer and yelled, 'Stop the
presses! Put Volume One on the cover!'"

The debriefing included Armstrong, Aldrin and Michael Collins
talking about the UFO sighting that NASA later denied had
happened. "They each describe it differently," says Godwin.
"They agree that it was big. Then they basically say, 'We don't
know what it was' and move on."

Godwin says he'd go into space himself "like a shot, though I
don't know if I'll live to see it become affordable."

He lives in hope. Billionaire American Robert Bigelow has vowed
to set up an orbiting hotel and casino. "He's already crossed
the biggest barrier... money," says Godwin.

What was that about final frontiers?





                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                      What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:48:51 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:48:51 -0500
Subject: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II


'The Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters'

Edited by Ronald Story - published 2001


'Astronauts, UFO Sightings' - page 94

[...]

(15) July 16, 1969 - Apollo XI: This was a mission on which a
UFO reportedly chased the spacecraft. 'Reportedly', indeed, but
not very accurate. Actually, several UFO stories have attached
themselves barnacle-like to man's first moon landing. A photo of
an insulation fragment taken soon after third-stage separation
has been widely published as a 'UFO' The astronauts watched
their booster through a telescope on the way to the moon.

[...]

James Oberg

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


The following is, according to Robert Godwin, from a formerly
'Classified' NASA document.

The 500 page transcript was obtained by Godwin, editor
of:

'Apollo 11 The NASA Mission Reports - Volume Two'

Published by Apogee Books an imprint of Collector's Guide
Publishing Inc., Box 62034, Burlington, Ontario, Canada, L7R 4K2

http://www.cgpublishing.com/

and available at:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1896522491/ref%3Dase%5Fcollectosguide
pu/103-6771266-5632664


The debriefing occured while Aldrin, Armstrong and Collins were
quarantined for three weeks at the Lunar Receiving Laboratory in
Houston, Texas.


The Apollo 11 Technical Crew Debriefing

July 31st 1969

Prepared by: Mission Operations Branch
Flight Crew Support Division

Volume I & 2

[in Godwin's book pages 38-40]

6.40    REST PERIODS

Aldrin:    We're all good sleepers. The first one was not as
            good as the second or third, but the first sleep
            period was still surprisingly restful as far as I'm
            concerned.

Collins:   I think particularly when you get into the later
            flights of extended EVA'S and lunar activity, somehow
            the crew must place themselves in a frame of mind of
            looking on the separation of the LM [Lunar Module] as
            the beginning of the flight plan and to relax, get
            plenty of sleep, and conserve their energies in all
            the events leading up to that point.To arrive in
            lunar orbit tired can create problems and it's
            possible to do that if you don't approach it in the
            right frame of mind.

Armstrong: I think Mike's hit the nail on the head. We did
            precisely that. We got a lot of rest and got into
            lunar orbit eager to go to work and that's a
            particularly fortunate position to be in.

Collins:   This is something we've talked about before the
            flight and I don't know how you can get yourself in
            that frame of mind but I think it is a frame of
            mind. You have to get yourself convinced that there
            will be a nice relaxing couple of days going to the
            moon.

Aldrin:    The first unusual thing that we saw I guess was 1 day
            out, or something, pretty close to the moon. It had a
            sizeable dimension to it, so we put the monocular on
            it.

Collins:   How'd we see this thing? Did we just look out the
            window and there it was?

Aldrin:    Yes, and we weren't sure but that it might be the
            S-IVB [Saturn Rocket Third Stage]. We called the
            ground and were told the S-IVB was 6000 miles away.
            We had a problem with the High Gain about this time,
            didn't we?

Collins:   There was something. We felt a bump or maybe I just
            imagined it.

Armstrong: He was wondering whether the MESA [Modular Equipment
            Stowage Assembly] had come off.

Collins:   I don't guess we felt anything.

Aldrin:    Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects
            going by at the various dumps and then we happened to
            see this one brighter object going by. We couldn't
            think of anything else it could be other than the
            S-IVB. We looked at it through the monocular and it
            seemed to have a bit of an L-shape to it.

Armstrong: Like an open suitcase.

Aldrin:    We were in PTC [Passive Thermal Control] at the time
            so each one of us had a chance to take a look at this
            and it certainly seemed to be within our vicinity and
            of a very sizeable dimension.

Armstrong: We should say that it was right at the limit of the
            resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell
            just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell
            the size without knowing the range or the range
            without knowing the size.

Aldrin:    So then I got down in the LEB [Lower Equipment Bay]
            and started looking for it in the optics. We were
            grossly misled because with the sextant off-focus
            what we saw appeared to be cylinder.

Armstrong: Or really two rings.

Aldrin:    Yes.

Armstrong: Two rings. Two connected rings.

Collins:   No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't
            look like two connected rings. You could see this
            thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you
            could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow
            cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the
            sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book
            shape. It was really weird.

Aldrin:    I guess there's not too much more to say about it
            other than it wasn't cylinder.

Collins:   It was during the period when we thought it was a
            cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd
            almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be.
            But we don't have any more conclusions than that
            really. The fact that we didn't see it much past this
            one time period - we really don't have a conclusion
            as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how
            far away it was. It was something that wasn't part of
            the urine dump, we're pretty sure of that. Skipping
            ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we
            fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking
            rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM.
            It could have been some Mylar or something that had
            somehow come loose from the LM.

Aldrin:    We thought it could have been a panel, but it didn't
            appear to have that shape at all.

Collins:   That's right, and for some reason, we thought it
            might have been a part of the High Gain Antenna. It
            might have been about the time we had high gain
            antenna problems. In the back of my mind, I have some
            reason to suspect that its origin was from the
            spacecraft.

Aldrin:    The other observation that I made accumulated
            gradually. I don't know whether I saw it the first
            night, but I'm sure I saw it the second night. I was
            trying to go to sleep with all the lights out. I
            observed what I thought were little flashes inside
            the cabin, spaced a couple of minutes apart and I
            didn't think too much about it other than just a note
            in my mind that they continued to be there. I
            couldn't explain why my eye would see these flashes.
            During trans-earth coast, we had more time and I
            devoted more opportunity to investigating what this
            could have been. It was at that point that I was able
            to observe on two different occasions that, instead
            of observing just one flash, I could see double
            flashes, at points separated by maybe a foot. At
            other times, I could see a line with no direction of
            motion and the only thing that comes to my mind is
            that this is some sort of penetration. At least
            that's my guess, without much to support it; some
            penetration of some object into the spacecraft that
            causes an emission as it enters the cabin itself.
            Sometimes it was one flash on entering. Possibly
            departing from an entirely different part of the
            cabin, outside the field of view. The double flashes
            appeared to have an entry and then impact on
            something such as the struts. For a while, I thought
            it might have been some static electricity because I
            was also able, in moving my hand up and down the
            sleep restraint, to generate very small sparks of
            static electricity. But there was a definite
            difference between the two as I observed it more and
            more. I tried to correlate this with the direction of
            the sun.When you put the window shades up there is
            still a small amount of Ieakage. You can generally
            tell within 20 or 30 degrees the direction of the
            sun. It seemed as though they were coming from that
            general direction; however, I really couldn't say if
            there was near enough evidence to support that these
            things were observable on the side of the spacecraft
            where the sun was. A little bit of evidence seemed to
            support this. I asked the others if they had seen any
            of these and, until about the last day, they hadn't.

Armstrong: Buzz, I'd seen some light, but I just always
            attributed this to sunlight, because the window
            covers leak a little bit of light no matter how
            tightly secured. The only time I observed it was the
            last night when we really looked for it. I spent
            probably an hour carefully watching the inside of the
            spacecraft and I probably made 50 significant
            observations in this period.

Aldrin:    Sometimes a minute or two would go by and then you'd
            see two within the space of 10 seconds. On an
            average, I'd say just as a guess it was maybe
            something like one a minute. Certainly more than
            enough to convince you that it wasn't an optical
            illusion. It did give you a rather funny feeling to
            contemplate that something was zapping through the
            cabin. There wasn't anything you could do about it.

Armstrong: It could be something like Buzz suggested. Mainly a
            neutron or some kind of an atomic particle that would
            be in the visible spectrum.

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


Robert Godwin's book 'Apollo 11 The NASA Mission Reports -
Volume Two' is a fascinating read. It contains a CD ROM with
much Extra Vehicular Activity footage, shot while the crew were
on the Moon and a more recent video interview with Buzz Aldrin,
in MPEG format. Well worth the price of $11.16 [US] at
amazon.com - see link toward top.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:33:47 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:54:22 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 20:32:38 -0600

 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >>I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
 >>to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
 >>reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
 >>macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
 >>stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.

 >I rather suspect Aldrin's comments are sincere and accurate, and
 >that he's telling the truth.

But then you would, wouldn't you? Just one more distracting and
pathetic appeal to conform to the conventional wisdom of a
skeptibunky elite - suspect in expression, exasperating in
complacency, and artful in deceit?

 >Of course, if you want to belief silly stuff, you have to assume
 >that anyone providing contrary testimony is a liar.

I won't be silly enough to let you define, for me, what's silly
in the first place, sir. Your cleverly employed but fallacial
"either/or", for instance, is seen for what it is by this member
of UpDate's crowd...

Truly, it's all flat black and bright white with you and your
lot, isn't it! Hot flash, Mr. "O", it's your black and white's
the illusion. All colors or absent of color is an ideal you
cling to that does not really exist in the, so called, real
world. Your truth is mitigated by the prevailing wind of that
which plumps your aggregate feed bag...

You make it too easy to remember that you hammer specious nails
into the coffin lid of something that scratches audibly to get
out, a scratching that is too airily passed off by you and your
tottering last century establishment as a nonevent unworthy of
serious attention - a thinly veiled admonition not to look
behind the anomalous curtain... Your curtain disintegrates of
its own accord, and the coffin lid's edges fray to purchaseless
slivers as you frantically continue to hammer your ineffective
nails...


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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
exceptionally 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:41:53 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:56:21 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 20:32:38 -0600

 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >>I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
 >>to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
 >>reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
 >>macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
 >>stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.

 >I rather suspect Aldrin's comments are sincere and accurate, and
 >that he's telling the truth.

 >Of course, if you want to belief silly stuff, you have to assume
 >that anyone providing contrary testimony is a liar.

Jim Oberg doesn't seem to have any trouble believing that Soviet
cosmonauts who claimed they saw UFOs while in space were liars.
He suggested on an AOL message board that they lied because they
had been paid off by ufologists to spend some time at plush
hotels for UFO conferences to tell their tales.

To me, this seems a far more scurrilous accusation than
suggesting that someone may have lied because they had been
ordered to do so on national security grounds. A military man
lying because he felt it was his duty to follow orders wouldn't
necessarily make him a 'liar' in the negative moral sense that
the word is used to describe someone who lies to gain personal
advantage. Lying for money certainly would.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

              Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:25:18 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:00:21 -0500
Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Mortellaro



 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: The Toronto Star


 >http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=2ad3feb
94d05b50d&pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1009407848798&
call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

 >Dec. 27, 2001. 09:15 AM

 >Armchair astronaut maps final frontier
 >Burlington man turns passion for space into books

 >Bill Taylor
 >Staff Reporter


 >OK, so space is the final frontier. But who knew one of the
 >border crossings would be in the back of a nondescript building
 >in a little industrial complex just off the QEW? The sort of
 >place you drive by three times before you find it.

 >Inside, Robert Godwin is on the moon...

 >"Cool, isn't it?" he says, turning away for a moment from his
 >computer screen.

 >The CD-ROM he's running shows a map of the route of the lunar
 >rover driven by astronauts David Scott and James Irwin on the
 >Apollo 15 mission in 1971. Click on a point and suddenly you're
 >there in the Hadley Rille region. You can turn 360 degrees, zoom
 >in on the stark hills and valleys, the craters and threatening
 >shadows of an alien world. And, if the loneliness starts to get
 >to you, turn back to the rover parked reassuringly nearby.

 >"This is what they saw," says Godwin. "And look, see? Just over
 >there. You can barely make it out. The landing module. Did you
 >know, by the way, that it was designed by a Canadian? Owen
 >Maynard."

 >Back on earth, Godwin's company, Apogee Books, has published 18
 >dauntingly detailed books on American space exploration, with
 >the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's full
 >co-operation and reprints of the agency's mission reports. The
 >latest venture delves into the Russian space program. Each comes
 >with a CD-ROM with hours of video and information.

<snip>

 >He lives in hope. Billionaire American Robert Bigelow has vowed
 >to set up an orbiting hotel and casino. "He's already crossed
 >the biggest barrier... money," says Godwin.

 >What was that about final frontiers?


Dear List and Errol,

(Thanks for the piece Errol... it brought back memories and
makes a point).

This piece brought back some memories during the time I
was working in space. If course, I've always been in space
and/or a little spacey, but I meant to write 'on the space
program at Grumman.' In them days we affectionately called
Grumman Aircraft and Engineering Company, 'Gremlin
Airtrash!'

Anyway, whilst I was working on OAO, I did have some wonderful
opportunities to do some work on the LEM, the Lunar Excursion
Module. And in an old and very large radar dome at their main
facility, there was a LEM simulator. Only this one was not
computer driven. It was a simple but very effective affair
consisting of the LEM itself (enclosed and with seat belts so
you did not get thrown off), a TV camera outside the LEM,
focused on the lunar surface. And that lunar surface was real.
It was taken from photographs and made to be nearly as exact as
possible to the actual terrain on which the LEM would ride.

The simulator had small wheels from which fed back the up and
down and left and right motions as the wheels rode on the 'lunar
surface.' This control loop was amplified appropriately and fed
back into the chair of the LEM. And 'ride 'em cowboy!'

You sat in the LEM, looked at a large TV screen and 'drove' the
LEM. In lieu of the LEM moving, the simulated lunar surface
moved as in a conveyor belt. And it was a long, long belt.

The reason I mention this, is that nearly everyone who sat in
that LEM became ill. Most got out looking pale because the ride
was bumpy and you had to turn to avoid 'craters.' This
continuous turning and jogging made you nauseous... read:
seasick. Even some of the astronauts whom I met. There were only
two of us who enjoyed this (then) wondrous look into our future.
Myself and Hank Courten.

In factoid, we would remain after work and ride the LEM for
hours and hours and hours, fighting with one the other for the
privilege of staying, never wishing to relinquish the ride to
the other.

And one last point. In the dome itself, we positioned firefly
lamps in the arrangement of stars which simulated a portion of
the sky. And to my detractors, I never once saw one a them stars
move around, bounce or otherwise make false moves. Even when
riding that bucking bronco of a LEM. Honest. They only do that
outside and once in a long while.

Maybe it's the Grip? Nah! I ain't started that stuff since, oh,
1998.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

               Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:13:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 16:59:27 -0500
Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Fleming


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: The Toronto Star

<snip>

 >The book on the Apollo 11 moon mission was at the printers when
 >a "junior clerk in Houston" turned up the astronauts'
 >debriefing. "The whole moon-landing mission, blow by blow, in
 >their own words. I called the printer and yelled, 'Stop the
 >presses! Put Volume One on the cover!'"

 >The debriefing included Armstrong, Aldrin and Michael Collins
 >talking about the UFO sighting that NASA later denied had
 >happened. "They each describe it differently," says Godwin.
 >"They agree that it was big. Then they basically say, 'We don't
 >know what it was' and move on."

I've always believed Apollo 11 UFO sightings to be an urban
legend, as Jim Oberg would have it. But if someone has really
uncovered Apollo 11 debriefing documents asserting this, it
would be hard to overstate their importance. I'd be interested
in reading the briefing documents and knowing more about the
reliability of this "junior clerk" before jumping to
conclusions. Given that Godwin seems to be a reliable source
quoted in a major newspaper, I think his claims deserve the most
vigorous investigation possible.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Carey

From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:06:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Carey


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >>Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
 >>actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson. Marcel recalls his father
 >>telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
 >>was the "real stuff." Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
 >>on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
 >>brought from Roswell. Johnson, after carefully and at length
 >>interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
 >>Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
 >>unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
 >>"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
 >>have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!

 >>--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >>Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >>Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

 >In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
 >Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
 >"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
 >on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
 >knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
 >side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
 >Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
 >pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
 >found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
 >pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
 >debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

To Kevin, List, All:

Nice to see Bond Johnson still trying to peddle his, 'I
Photographed A Flying Saucer', tale yet again. Sort of
comforting. Must mean it's a new year. Hold on. Let me check my
calendar. Yep, it's 2002. Does it at least once a year, no
matter how many times it's shot down, or how silly he looks. The
"Little Engine That Could".

 >Dr. Johnson, at no point, interviewed me. I interviewed him. The
 >story he told me originally is in direct convict with that he
 >tells today. As just a single example, he told me that he was
 >told, by General Ramey, that the material in his office was part
 >of a weather balloon. Today, Dr. Johnson denies he said this,
 >even after hearing himself, on tape, make just that statement.
 >The only pure fabrications we have are claims by Dr. Johnson
 >that begin with the fact he unwrapped the debris, to the story
 >that he handed General Ramey the note in his hand (which, if
 >true, certainly negates the work of those trying to understand
 >it), that General Ramey didn't know  what was in his office, and
 >his continued attacks on those of us with whom he disagrees.

 >I'll make one other comment here. In the last year two members
 >of Dr. Johnson's RPIT have asked for copies of my taped
 >interviews and the correspondence I had with Dr. Johnson. They
 >wanted, I suppose, to review the data, especially since Dr.
 >Johnson and I seemed to be at such odds. They could listen to
 >the tapes, hear Dr. Johnson make the statements that he claimed
 >he never made, and they could read the letters that suggested I
 >wanted to resolve the differences and the lack of candor on Dr.
 >Johnson's part. I went to the time and expense of making the
 >copies and paying for the postage. All that I asked was that
 >they make some comment on the material, not necessarily in a
 >public forum. Since then I have heard nothing from either of
 >them. They have had the material for many months, have had
 >adequate time to review the material and even to discuss it with
 >Dr. Johnson, but they have done nothing about any of this. Had I
 >been wrong or misrepresented the material, you can be sure that
 >we would all have been hearing about it. The silence is
 >deafening and I think supportive of my position. Dr. Johnson's
 >first interviews, with me, reflect the reality of the situation
 >on July 8, 1947, and his later tales smack of confabulation and
 >wishful thinking.

 >KRandle

Last year, against my better judgement, I engaged in a private
debate with one of the RPIT members - he shall remain nameless -
about Bond Johnson and the Ft. Worth photographs. A score or
e-mails were exchanged between us before, as expected, the RPIT
member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
might have been excised for economy's sake. To others - and no
doubt this was the intended impression - it conjures up images
of cutting and splicing different answers to different questions
that had been asked on the tape in order to alter intended
meanings. Not a good thing.

Attempting to get to the bottom of this charge - as I had heard
it several time before - I asked my RPIT member what exactly had
been "edited". Were the 'edits' at the paragraph, sentence,
word, morpheme or phoneme level? He claimed to have heard the
tapes, so I expected an informed reply. However, like the
chess-player who sees check-mate coming with the next move, he
simply ran and hid. I never heard from him again.

As with Roswell debunkers, there is a double standard at work
here. Pro-Roswell investigators must dot every possible 'i' and
cross every possible 't', or it doesn't count as evidence, while
the debunkers  - please don't refer to them as 'skeptics' - can
throw out stuff, have it shot down, then throw it out again and
again. As long as there is one, last, thin reed to cling to
- even if it's only in their own mind - the debunker will hold on
to the point of silliness. When that reed gives way, rather than
concede, they run away and hide.


Tom Carey











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                 Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? -

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:35:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:08:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? -


 >From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:56:15 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Kinross Incident?

<snip>

 >>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>[GCI] radar.

 ><snip>

 >It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

 >How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >cause disaster?

<snip>

Hello all,

at:

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Lakes/description_volcanic_lakes_gas_rele
ase.html

One finds most there is to know about CO2 and lakes.

CO2 is heavier than air, runs down slopes and fills depressions.

Not a good candidate at 7000 feet.

Methane?

Clouds can be seen on radar because they are denser than air:
droplets in suspension. They can thus reflect the radar waves
and return an echo.

Stealth technology implies part _diverting_ and part absorbing
the radar waves.

Would a methane or some other gas cloud return an echo?

Well... is there any data from the Bermuda Triangle?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:12:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >>Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

 >>http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

 >>Had a nice long fonecon [phone conversation] this afternoon with
 >>Irving Newton, 78, of San Antonio, TX, the Ramey weatherman and
 >>Roswell debris "identifier." He seemed pleased to hear from me
 >>(we never had talked before) and was quite open and eager to
 >>talk.

 >Ed, List, All -

 >In my conversations and correspondence with Irving Newton, I
 >have always found him cooperative, cordial and friendly. He is
 >eager to talk about his involvement in the Roswell case.

 >>He has quite a collection of Roswell memorabilia and offered to
 >>"lay it all out" if I will come to San Antonio to visit with
 >>him. He has several copies -- but no negatives or originals --
 >>of the photo of him in General Ramey's office. He has no idea
 >>who took the photo. He confirmed most of the stories told about
 >>him in the Roswell accounts, with a few notable exceptions:

 >>He was the only weatherman on duty in air operations on
 >>the late afternoon of July 8, 1947. They ran a 24 hour shop
 >>and a weatherman was supposed to be in air operations at
 >>all times.

 >>He was summoned to Ramey's office first by Col. Dubose and then
 >>personally by Gen. Ramey. He supports accounts of harsh language
 >>from Ramey ordering him to Ramey's office. He thinks he arrived
 >>at Ramey's office -- just a few blocks from air operations --
 >>between 4:30 and 5 p.m. (That must have been only a short time
 >>after I had finished taking my fotos and departed Ramey's
 >>office.)

 >I think this is the first time that he identified the colonel
 >specifically. When I spoke with him, he just suggested that he
 >was met by a colonel who told him that they had some debris from
 >Roswell that most thought was a flying saucer but that the
 >general thought was a weather balloon. He, the general, wanted
 >Irving to identify it. (Moore and Berlitz suggested that Ramey,
 >though the colonel, was telling Newton to identify whatever he
 >saw as a weather balloon but I think the colonel was just
 >giving Newton the facts of the situation and expected him to
 >identify the material, or rather, confirm, Ramey's analysis. I
 >don't think he was being ordered to identify it as anything
 >specific. He was supposed to look at it and then tell the
 >general what he thought it was.)

 >>Newton was met and briefed by COL. Dubose who told him upon his
 >>arrival at Ramey's office that the General was uncertain whether
 >>this was a flying saucer and maybe it was a weather device, and
 >>he wanted Newton to take a look. Newton said he took one look at
 >>the debris spread out on the carpet and said "If that is not a
 >>Rawin device I will eat it!"

 >>Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
 >>office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

 >The point is that he would not know, for certain, that it is
 >what Marcel brought from Roswell because he wasn't there when
 >the material arrived. This point, however, is important to Dr.
 >Johnson who makes the claim that some of the real debris was in
 >among the bits of the weather balloon debris.

Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

 >>He says he has said this over and over for years to
 >>interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
 >>ignored his statements.

 >This is blatant "Bondism". I have accurately reported exactly
 >what Newton told me and I have the tapes to back it up. I have
 >letters in which I have asked him for clarification of his
 >report and I have reported on that as well. There is nowhere
 >that I have ignored his statements, Dr. Johnson's allegation to
 >the contrary.

These are Newton's words to Bond. Bond can't help that Newton is
feeling ignored.

 >>Newton seems to remember a few people in the office "taking
 >>notes". He assumed them to be reporters. He was not too clear on
 >>that point. It was not an especially momentous event for him. He
 >>said that Major Marcel was there and followed him around the
 >>office trying to get him to look at "some of the sticks" he was
 >>holding and to see the strange symbols on them that Marcel
 >>thought were "not of this world." He does recall seeing strange
 >>random figures on some of these sticks.

 >Newton told me, and I believe it to be an important point, he
 >did not know Marcel and was introduced to none of the men in the
 >room he did not know. In other words, Newton has assumed that
 >the man asking the questions was Major Marcel, but Marcel has
 >said that he was ordered by Ramey not to open his mouth.
 >Therefore, Marcel was not the major asking the questions and
 >that officer was more than likely Major Charles A. Cashon,
 >Ramey's public affairs officer. (Newton didn't know him either.)

Yes, this could be the case.

 >And interestingly, Dr. Johnson has claimed that he was the only
 >reporter to go to Ramey's office and speak with him, newspaper
 >reports and other evidence to the contrary.

When Bond took the photos, there were no other reporters in the room.
Do you have evidence that there were others?


 >Colonel DuBose
 >(later brigadier general) said that there were four or five
 >reporters in the room asking questions. Since DuBose would have
 >known the officers present, all of whom would have been in
 >uniform and thereby identifying themselves as officers, those
 >DuBose thought were reporters were in civilian clothes and
 >unknown to him. Given the circumstances, it's clear that these
 >men were reporters, some of whom worked for radio stations. Dr.
 >Johnson has confirmed for us that other reporters did, in fact,
 >interview General Ramey, contrary to what Dr. Johnson now
 >claims.

Who were those reporters? What is your evidence?

 >Finally we have this last little bit of invention in an attempt
 >to confirm that some "real" debris was in the room. In no other
 >interviews had Newton ever suggested he remembered strange
 >figures on the balloon.

I don't dispute this but that doesn't mean that he didn't say
this to Bond.

 >>This all follows closely several accounts that I have read about
 >>Newton and his visit to Ramey's office. But there are mysteries
 >>here: why was Marcel's hat and tie gone from the radiator in the
 >>Newton foto?

 >We don't know that these items were Marcel's. It is more likely
 >that these were Ramey's and removed for no nefarious purpose
 >other than to remove some clutter from the office.

 >>Would the major have gotten into uniform to talk
 >>with a warrant officer when he didn't for a media photographer?

 >Maybe Marcel didn't care. Maybe he didn't expect to meet with a
 >newspaper photographer. Maybe he didn't have a tie and didn't
 >put it on at all, so these assumptions by Dr. Johnson are
 >invalid.

 >This is not to mention that I find it difficult to believe that
 >a major would walk into a general's office and toss his hat and
 >tie onto the radiator. If Marcel had removed his tie, he would
 >have stuffed it into his pocket and since the hat is soft cloth
 >and relatively small, he could have done the same thing with it.
 >Military protocol suggests that Marcel keep his personal items
 >grouped together and not tossed around the office.

Bond was speculating and you are too. There are no answers to
these questions.

 >>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >photographs were shot and nothing more.

Maybe and maybe not. Careful inventory and description of all
material in all photos would settle this question.

 >>In the days following, Newton received many phone calls and
 >>letters from other AAF weathermen who had a variety of comments
 >>for him, but not from the press at that time.

 >Of course not. The story was dead. The material identified as a
 >weather balloon and radar target. There was no story. Those
 >others probably saw Newton's picture in the newspaper and called
 >to find out what was going on.

 >>At a later time he was interviewed by Life Magazine and other
 >>magazines and a TV company interviewed him on camera in his
 >>home, etc.

 >>He and his wife were flown to Roswell in July 1996 for him to
 >>make a speech to tell his story. It was in an auditorium and
 >>there was an admission charged. He described his experiences of
 >>July 8, 1947, and told the audience that the debris in Ramey's
 >>office was the "real stuff" that Marcel had brought from
 >>Roswell, but that several of the reporters simply ignored his
 >>statements in this regard. The inquiries have been few and far
 >>between recently and he was not invited to attend the last two
 >>Roswell anniversary bashes.

 >>Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
 >>actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson. Marcel recalls his father
 >>telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
 >>was the "real stuff." Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
 >>on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
 >>brought from Roswell. Johnson, after carefully and at length
 >>interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
 >>Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
 >>unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
 >>"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
 >>have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!

 >>--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >>Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >>Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

 >In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
 >Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
 >"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
 >on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
 >knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
 >side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
 >Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
 >pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
 >found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
 >pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
 >debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

If the material on Ramey's carpet is not the material from
Roswell, then what is it? It's not a RAWIN. If it's not a RAWIN,
what is it? Where is your evidence that it is a weather balloon,
other than the story of a switch. Why not take a close look at
the photos and try to determine just what is on the carpet?

The only hard evidence we have are the photos.

Your disagreements with Bond are irrelevant to the main issue:
what is the nature of the debris?

Why are you so reluctant to participate in an in depth
discussion of these photos?

You and I both agree that Marcel didn't misidentify and then
carry a weather balloon and radar target from Roswell to FW. We
both agree that the Roswell debris that Marcel found was very
unusual and probably "alien". Our main disagreement is whether a
radar target and weather balloon were substituted for the debris
that Marcel carted to FW. If that's the case, you should be able
to identify the type of target and balloon. And the other debris
on the carpet should be easily identified as being from some
mundane assemblage of objects that we'd expect the General would
have readily available for the substitution. These include I
beams, various wires and connectors, and many other parts and
gizmos that are not normally associated with passive weather
balloons and radar reflectors.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:43:15 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:15:45 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 20:32:38 -0600


 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >>I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
 >>to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
 >>reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
 >>macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
 >>stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.

 >I rather suspect Aldrin's comments are sincere and accurate, and
 >that he's telling the truth.

 >Of course, if you want to belief silly stuff, you have to assume
 >that anyone providing contrary testimony is a liar.


Oberg, you take the cake, Dude. You gotta be the most fallacious
bugger I ever came across, purely by virtue of your crude and
oft transparent attempt at making sense and telling your story.
That story is a construct of falsehoods so blatantly obvious to
anyone with half an intellect, that it is actually laughable to
read your tripe, a food I've never really appreciated.

You sir, are not a very nice man, nor an erudite one, nor do you
even make the attempt at making sense. At least in my opinion.
_And_ you have never apologized. I have a short (I wear boots
now) but telling Sicilian phrase which describes the
gobbledygook coming forth from your virtual pen... phonetically
... _Shtoonad y boodoo, una credeena.

However, other than that, I really like you. You make me laugh.
I always laugh at people who fall down a lot. Most especially,
when they don't get hurt. Which in your case, is a damned shame!


Jim Mortellaro
Capo di Tutti Capi of Perceived Abductees









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 13

             Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 16:17:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:22:30 -0500
Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 20:32:38 -0600

 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:36:04 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: For The Record - FIDO UFO: Astronauts & UFOs

 >>I suspect that Aldrin's and other kneejerk response
 >>to the often asked UFO question is ingrained through constant
 >>reminders by NASA not to discuss it. Besides, ya can't be a
 >>macho 'Right Stuff' pilot with NASA and believe all that UFO
 >>stuff-unless you are Gordon Cooper.

 >I rather suspect Aldrin's comments are sincere and accurate, and
 >that he's telling the truth.

 >Of course, if you want to belief silly stuff, you have to assume
 >that anyone providing contrary testimony is a liar.


What silly stuff - and who decides what's silly and what isn't?
Can't believe everything NASA tells me. Whaddaya gonna do with
an outfit that fakes Moon photos for publicity purposes? And no,
I don't think it was a hoax - just some of the photos.

The American flag in front of the between-the-camera lens
registration marks, I thought was a nice touch.

Now that's silly.

Foolishness like that drags the whole thing down. There's a big
difference between lying and toeing the line. They do, they
don't. Too bad they can't seem to make up their minds.

How come Aldrin et al are true blue and Cooper's the dog?

BTW James - what do you think of Paul Hill's work on the
subject?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:07:59 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:00:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


All,

Can I add a few comments and details here that might have been
missed and some hard facts that are obtained from direct
examination of JBJ's photographs, something I've been
extensively involved in for the last 3 years?


 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800
 >>Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

 >>http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

 >>Had a nice long fonecon [phone conversation] this afternoon with
 >>Irving Newton, 78, of San Antonio, TX, the Ramey weatherman and
 >>Roswell debris "identifier." He seemed pleased to hear from me
 >>(we never had talked before) and was quite open and eager to
 >>talk.

 >Ed, List, All -

 >In my conversations and correspondence with Irving Newton, I
 >have always found him cooperative, cordial and friendly. He is
 >eager to talk about his involvement in the Roswell case.

 >>He has quite a collection of Roswell memorabilia and offered to
 >>"lay it all out" if I will come to San Antonio to visit with
 >>him. He has several copies -- but no negatives or originals --
 >>of the photo of him in General Ramey's office. He has no idea
 >>who took the photo. He confirmed most of the stories told about
 >>him in the Roswell accounts, with a few notable exceptions:

 >>He was the only weatherman on duty in air operations on
 >>the late afternoon of July 8, 1947. They ran a 24 hour shop
 >>and a weatherman was supposed to be in air operations at
 >>all times.

 >>He was summoned to Ramey's office first by Col. Dubose and then
 >>personally by Gen. Ramey. He supports accounts of harsh language
 >>from Ramey ordering him to Ramey's office. He thinks he arrived
 >>at Ramey's office -- just a few blocks from air operations --
 >>between 4:30 and 5 p.m. (That must have been only a short time
 >>after I had finished taking my fotos and departed Ramey's
 >>office.)

 >I think this is the first time that he identified the colonel
 >specifically. When I spoke with him, he just suggested that he
 >was met by a colonel who told him that they had some debris from
 >Roswell that most thought was a flying saucer but that the
 >general thought was a weather balloon. He, the general, wanted
 >Irving to identify it. (Moore and Berlitz suggested that Ramey,
 >though the colonel, was telling Newton to identify whatever he
 >saw as a  weather balloon but I think the colonel was just
 >giving Newton the facts of the situation and expected him to
 >identify the material, or rather, confirm, Ramey's analysis. I
 >don't think he was being ordered to identify it as anything
 >specific. He was supposed to look at it and then tell the
 >general what he thought it was.)

 >>Newton was met and briefed by COL. Dubose who told him upon his
 >>arrival at Ramey's office that the General was uncertain whether
 >>this was a flying saucer and maybe it was a weather device, and
 >>he wanted Newton to take a look. Newton said he took one look at
 >>the debris spread out on the carpet and said "If that is not a
 >>Rawin device I will eat it!"

 >>Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
 >>office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

 >The point is that he would not know, for certain, that it is
 >what Marcel brought from Roswell because he wasn't there when
 >the material arrived. This point, however, is important to Dr.
 >Johnson who makes the claim that some of the real debris was in
 >among the bits of the weather balloon debris.

The chronology of Newton's involvement seems to have been
greatly glossed over by many researchers, but it must be noted
that in Moore and Shandera's, 'Three Hours That Shook the Press',
MUFON Journal #269 Sept 1990, the shift pattern of FWAAF were
studied to see just when the Met Office at FWAAF was single
manned, as Newton was adamant he was the only officer on duty at
the time he got the call to go over to Ramey's office. According
to the authors the shifts at the FWAAF Met office changed at 6pm
from the 1st shift a 2 man team, to the 2nd shift which was a
_single_ manned watch.

If Newton was alone in the Met office that day he _must_ have
been on the 2nd shift which came on duty at 6pm otherwise he's
mistaken of his facts which would throw the rest of his
information into doubt.

The prospect he was on this later shift seems to be supported by
the timing of the Newton ID AP wire release at _6.30pm_, and
also the very late appearance of the supporting Newton/Debris
photo on the wires.

<snip>

 >And interestingly, Dr. Johnson has claimed that he was the only
 >reporter to go to Ramey's office and speak with him, newspaper
 >reports and other evidence to the contrary. Colonel DuBose
 >(later brigadier general) said that there were four or five
 >reporters in the room asking questions. Since DuBose would have
 >known the officers present, all of whom would have been in
 >uniform and thereby identifying themselves as officers, those
 >DuBose thought were reporters were in civilian clothes and
 >unknown to him. Given the circumstances, it's clear that these
 >men were reporters, some of whom worked for radio stations. Dr.
 >Johnson has confirmed for us that other reporters did, in fact,
 >interview General Ramey, contrary to what Dr. Johnson now
 >claims.

I've debated this point often and at length with Kevin but I've
still to see the evidence of Ramey being _directly_
"interviewed" by anyone. Most newspaper coverage reprinted the
copy they received form the wire-services they were affiliated
to, ie AP,UP etc and if you read these of't repeated (and
sometimes re-worked) reports it becomes clear, at least to me,
the main mouthpiece for FWAAF throughout the events of the 8th
July was one of the base IO's Maj Edwin Kirton relaying Ramey's
statements, his name pops up time and again and is even
referenced as being the FWAAF source who phoned the FBI with the
information contained in the famous FBI Teletype of 6.17pm, note
it was Kirton who phoned them, not the other way round.

A preemptive strike for the AAF perhaps to kill any active FBI
involvement and investigation?.

 >Finally we have this last little bit of invention in an attempt
 >to confirm that some "real" debris was in the room. In no other
 >interviews had Newton ever suggested he remembered strange
 >figures on the balloon.

Well he's recalled them well enough for artist Kimberly Moeller to
draw them out and receive Newton's endorsement for accuracy.

 >>This all follows closely several accounts that I have read about
 >>Newton and his visit to Ramey's office. But there are mysteries
 >>here: why was Marcel's hat and tie gone from the radiator in the
 >>Newton foto?
 >
 >We don't know that these items were Marcel's. It is more likely
 >that these were Ramey's and removed for no nefarious purpose
 >other than to remove some clutter from the office.

No, Ramey had his tie _on_ in the pictures, DuBose hasn't but
why would he leave his cap and tie in his commander's office and
not his own?.

There is also the briefcase and documents on the chair next to
the radiator that holds the cap and tie, and these too are
missing from the Newton shot together with all that interesting
debris.

 >>Would the major have gotten into uniform to talk
 >>with a warrant officer when he didn't for a media photographer?

 >Maybe Marcel didn't care. Maybe he didn't expect to meet with a
 >newspaper photographer. Maybe he didn't have a tie and didn't
 >put it on at all, so these assumptions by Dr. Johnson are
 >invalid.

 >This is not to mention that I find it difficult to believe that
 >a major would walk into a general's office and toss his hat and
 >tie onto the radiator. If Marcel had removed his tie, he would
 >have stuffed it into his pocket and since the hat is soft cloth
 >and relatively small, he could have done the same thing with it.
 >Military protocol suggests that Marcel keep his personal items
 >grouped together and not tossed around the office.

Maybe they _were_ grouped together with his briefcase and
papers? Just speculation.

 >>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >photographs were shot and nothing more.

Nope... Not only has the paper the debris is sitting on been
relocated in the Newton shots, it _has_ had a number of _none_
balloon/target type debris removed. ie a _very_ heavy gauge
piece of metallic debris showing right angle edge folding and
with clear symbols is no longer visible, yet it's surrounding
debris is still there in the Newton shot.

So, by the time the Newton shot was taken and the Balloon cover
story agreed on, the debris seems to have been sanitised to
resemble, as best it could the explanation being given out as a
press release and supported by the Newton picture.

The sanitisation exercise may not be just my flight of fancy, as
our very recent measurements of the debris taken from the
computer models RPIT member Andrew Lavoie has produced have
shown, there _may_ well be some reflector debris mixed in there,
_but_ a significant part of the debris _connot_ be radar target
related due to it's measurements and some most decidedly isn't
target related because of it's construction and features, ie
un-powered radar targets didn't have cables attached.

For those interested in reviewing some of these un-radar target
like points in the debris, my MUFON Journal article due in the
Feb issue I believe, illustrates a number.


Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 18:24:53 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:04:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800


Tom Carey wrote:

 >Last year, against my better judgement, I engaged in a private
 >debate with one of the RPIT members - he shall remain nameless -
 >about Bond Johnson and the Ft. Worth photographs. A score or
 >e-mails were exchanged between us before, as expected, the RPIT
 >member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
 >guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
 >that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
 >might have been excised for economy's sake. To others - and no
 >doubt this was the intended impression - it conjures up images
 >of cutting and splicing different answers to different questions
 >that had been asked on the tape in order to alter intended
 >meanings. Not a good thing.

Hi Tom, List, All -

Lets, just for fun, go through this "Randle edited the tapes"
crap one last time. Originally, a decade ago, after Dr. Johnson
changed his story and said that Ramey hadn't told him that the
debris was a weather balloon, that Ramey didn't know what it was
until after Dr. Johnson left his office, and the like was
claimed, I called Dr. Johnson to ask about it. When I read to
him from the transcripts, he said that he didn't remember saying
those things and didn't think he would have said them. For his
convenience, I made an edited version of the tapes so that he
could hear himself make the statements he said he didn't make. I
left in the context, the questions, and some of the subsequent
material so that Dr. Johnson could understand that I was not
taking his statements out of context or that I hadn't understood
what he said. Even with these "edits" the tape ran to more than
an hour.

Later, when Dr. Johnson began to say that I had edited the
tapes, implying that I had altered them, I sent to him a full
set so that the only breaks were where I had to turn the tapes
over. There were no edits and Dr. Johnson had, in complete form,
everything that I had. When he again said that I had edited the
tapes and started this nonsense I sent him another full set,
along with the correspondence between us, and other
documentation. I have since supplied that material to, at the
very least, two members of the RPIT without a comment by them.

So, yes, there was an edited tape, but nothing was altered. Dr.
Johnson had two complete sets of the tapes in which he says all
the things I have reported he said with no hint of a break or
edit in the most important of the material. He, and his RPIT can
hear him say all the things that he denies he said right up to
and including telling me, seven separate times, that he wrote
the July 9 article that appeared in the Star-Telegram, important
because the last paragraph tells us that Ramey had identified
the material as a weather balloon, in stark contrast to what Dr.
Johnson claims now. (Which also explains why he now denies that
he wrote the article.)

I think I have explained all this before, but Tom's email
suggested that maybe I should post it one more time. Dr.
Johnson's new stories are simply not supported by the evidence,
his taped interviews with me, and the documentation available. I
believe the problem for the RPIT is that if I am right, then
much of the work they have been doing is irrelevant.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:55:14 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:06:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


 >From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >Nice to see Bond Johnson still trying to peddle his, 'I
 >Photographed A Flying Saucer', tale yet again. Sort of
 >comforting. Must mean it's a new year. Hold on. Let me check my
 >calendar. Yep, it's 2002. Does it at least once a year, no
 >matter how many times it's shot down, or how silly he looks. The
 >"Little Engine That Could".

This is a four-year old interview that I found on the web and
decided to post to clarify just what Newton was saying four
years ago. It was the only interview I was able to find, and not
an attempt to bolster our position but simply make some points
clear about what was said and what wasn't. I didn't ask Bond's
permission nor did we collude in any way. He is not responsible
for the posting of the Newton interview, I am.

<snip>

 >As with Roswell debunkers, there is a double standard at work
 >here. Pro-Roswell investigators must dot every possible 'i' and
 >cross every possible 't', or it doesn't count as evidence, while
 >the debunkers - please don't refer to them as 'skeptics' - can
 >throw out stuff, have it shot down, then throw it out again and
 >again. As long as there is one, last, thin reed to cling to
 >- even if it's only in their own mind - the debunker will hold on
 >to the point of silliness. When that reed gives way, rather than
 >concede, they run away and hide.

I don't understand how the this paragraph applies to us. We are
not debunkers or skeptics but independent researchers. We're
trying to introduce new evidence; we'd like others to take a
close look at our efforts. Andrew's measurements are an example
of what we've uncovered. There's much more, but you have to be
willing to try to follow our reasoning. Everything we've
discovered is open to honest discussion.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                     Re: Bruni On James Whale Show - UK

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:44:17 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:22:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Bruni On James Whale Show - UK


Georgina Bruni will be on the James Whale Show, Talksport
National Radio, U.K., from 11pm on Monday 14 January, to discuss
the latest updates on the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                       Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:52:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:25:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >>>Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

 >>>http://www.abduct.com/features/f28.htm

<snip>

 >>>--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >>>Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >>>Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

 >>In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
 >>Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
 >>"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
 >>on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
 >>knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
 >>side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
 >>Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
 >>pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
 >>found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
 >>pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
 >>debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

 >If the material on Ramey's carpet is not the material from
 >Roswell, then what is it? It's not a RAWIN. If it's not a RAWIN,
 >what is it? Where is your evidence that it is a weather balloon,
 >other than the story of a switch. Why not take a close look at
 >the photos and try to determine just what is on the carpet?

 >The only hard evidence we have are the photos.

 >Your disagreements with Bond are irrelevant to the main issue:
 >what is the nature of the debris?

 >Why are you so reluctant to participate in an in depth
 >discussion of these photos?

 >You and I both agree that Marcel didn't misidentify and then
 >carry a weather balloon and radar target from Roswell to FW. We
 >both agree that the Roswell debris that Marcel found was very
 >unusual and probably "alien". Our main disagreement is whether a
 >radar target and weather balloon were substituted for the debris
 >that Marcel carted to FW. If that's the case, you should be able
 >to identify the type of target and balloon. And the other debris
 >on the carpet should be easily identified as being from some
 >mundane assemblage of objects that we'd expect the General would
 >have readily available for the substitution. These include I
 >beams, various wires and connectors, and many other parts and
 >gizmos that are not normally associated with passive weather
 >balloons and radar reflectors.

My server was down for several hours today, so maybe I am living
in a timewarp. Doesn't the Johnson statement have an August 1998
date on it and wasn't it discussed back then? Why recycle this?.

There are, incidentally, others who handled wreckage such as
Loretta Proctor and Bill Brazel as well as Jack (Pappy)
Henderson, John Kromshroeder, Jason Groote. No, what the latter
three handled was not part of a V-2 rocket,


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                       Bruni On James Whale Show - UK

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:44:17 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:29:47 -0500
Subject: Bruni On James Whale Show - UK


Georgina Bruni will be on the James Whale Show, Talksport
National Radio, U.K., from 11pm on Monday 14 January, to discuss
the latest updates on the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

             Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:21:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:45:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident? - Ledger


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:35:46 -0500

 >>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:56:15 -0400
 >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Kinross Incident?

 ><snip>

 >>>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>>[GCI] radar.

 >><snip>

 >>It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >>the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >>when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >>villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >>A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >>pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

 >>How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >>Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >>car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >>cause disaster?

 ><snip>

 >Hello all,

 >at:

 >http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Lakes/description_volcanic_lakes_gas_re
lease.html

 >One finds most there is to know about CO2 and lakes.

 >CO2 is heavier than air, runs down slopes and fills depressions.

 >Not a good candidate at 7000 feet.

 >Methane?

 >Clouds can be seen on radar because they are denser than air:
 >droplets in suspension. They can thus reflect the radar waves
 >and return an echo.

 >Stealth technology implies part _diverting_ and part absorbing
 >the radar waves.

 >Would a methane or some other gas cloud return an echo?

 >Well... is there any data from the Bermuda Triangle?

 >Regards


Hello Serge and Robert,

So far nothing definitive about radar bouncing back from methane
bubbles. C02 definitely too heavy.

As for data from the BT, none that I'm aware of. Just a theory -
albeit a good one I think [not sure which engineer or scientist
it was that came up with it] - that poses hydrates releasing
gases when exposed to sea water after underwater subterranean
subsidence exposing the frozen hydrate layer which immediatly
would turn to gas. Apparently that area [BT] is a good place for
this type of thing to happen. I wondered about certain areas of
the Great Lakes perhaps having the same properties. Aircraft,
vessels and even submarines could be in danger of being
destroyed if there's anything to this theory.

I know that the Wollops Island rocket launches [over 4,000] in
the 60s released gases into the upper stratosphere for whatever
reason and were tracked but I'm not sure how. Optically for sure
but I don't know if they used radar.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

               Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:06:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:49:21 -0500
Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I - Friedman


 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:13:33 -0600
 >Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - I
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >>Source: The Toronto Star

 ><snip>

 >>The book on the Apollo 11 moon mission was at the printers when
 >>a "junior clerk in Houston" turned up the astronauts'
 >>debriefing. "The whole moon-landing mission, blow by blow, in
 >>their own words. I called the printer and yelled, 'Stop the
 >>presses! Put Volume One on the cover!'"

 >>The debriefing included Armstrong, Aldrin and Michael Collins
 >>talking about the UFO sighting that NASA later denied had
 >>happened. "They each describe it differently," says Godwin.
 >>"They agree that it was big. Then they basically say, 'We don't
 >>know what it was' and move on."

 >I've always believed Apollo 11 UFO sightings to be an urban
 >legend, as Jim Oberg would have it. But if someone has really
 >uncovered Apollo 11 debriefing documents asserting this, it
 >would be hard to overstate their importance. I'd be interested
 >in reading the briefing documents and knowing more about the
 >reliability of this "junior clerk" before jumping to
 >conclusions. Given that Godwin seems to be a reliable source
 >quoted in a major newspaper, I think his claims deserve the most
 >vigorous investigation possible.

I called Godwin sometime back after the early article appeared
and talked to him and got copies from the debriefing report.
There is no question that a sighting was made by all three,
though they differed in their description and there is no
question it was taken seriously. I notified John Greenwald who
also obtained a copy of the debriefing. Definitely not an urban
legend. Not a great sighting either. Too bad Jim [Oberg] didn't
check first before saying there was nothing to it.

On the subject of urban legends, I don't agree with Josh
Goldstein that the Spielberg Reagan story is suspect because of
Jaime Shandera. I knew him quite well. He worked long and hard.
He certainly had nothing to do with the MJ-12 documents put
forth by Tim Cooper (many of which I showed in my MUFON 2000
paper were frauds). He had nothing to do with SOM 1.01. As I
pointed out in the paper, the EBE, CT, and TF memos still look
good. I presume all the critics noted that, for example, the GAO
guys noted the use of the strange classification TOP SECRET
RESTRICTED in genuine, still classified, documents from the CT
time frame.. despite claims that it hadn't been used?? Early
absence of evidence is not evidence for absence. As Jim Oberg
should have also learned by now.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:18:38 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 06:53:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

Tom, List, All -

I hesitate to revisit all this, but as I was looking up some
documentation for a response to Ed's latest, I came across a
letter that I had written to be included in the material sent to
a member of the RPIT team. I think it should end part of the
discussion at this point.

Tom wrote:

 >A score or
 >e-mails were exchanged between us before, as expected, the RPIT
 >member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
 >guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
 >that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
 >might have been excised for economy's sake.

On the third tape, in which we, Dr. Johnson and I, discuss his
claim of changed quotes and I read to him from my transcripts,
he asks that I send copies of the tapes so that he can hear what
is said. The important point (and I wish that Errol would allow
all caps to go through here so that I could shout it), Dr.
Johnson asks that I just send him copies of the specific
quotes... in other words, Dr. Johnson asks for "edited" tapes.
Now he has the gall to accuse me of editing the tapes, after he
asked that I do it. And yes, his request is on the tapes so that
he has heard himself say that, and all his minions, if they have
listened to the tapes, have heard him ask for an "edited" copy.
Too bad he forgot about that, and too bad I had forgotten about
it as well.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:00:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

David (and Tom Carey please feel free to weigh in),

Let me see if I've got this straight.

Marcel accompanied real Roswell debris to Fort Worth.

Ramey, knowing it was on the way, ordered up some ordinary
balloon debris to display in his office in its place.

Where did he get this ready-made debris on such short notice?
After all, it's not likely that he could just turn to an aide
and say go out back of Hangar B and bring me back some balloon
(and presumably Rawin) debris. And make it pronto.

In fact, if he needed some local stuff, you'd think the person
he would have ordered to produce it would be - you guessed it
- Irving Newton.

Just for the record, what do you and Carey think that stuff is
on Ramey's floor? And where do you think it came from?

Moreover, what about that brown wrapping paper on the floor?
Didn't that come from Roswell? Why wasn't the real stuff simply
wrapped back up in the paper it came in and sent on its way?
That would be the expedient thing to do, assuming time was at a
premium.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                      Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:08:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps


 >From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>[GCI] radar.

 ><snip>

 >It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

 >How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >cause disaster?


Funny how the facts of this case are biting you guys on the ass,
and still... you keep chomping at the bit.

Another case of re-hashing... and re-appointing an alternative
explanation to a classic UFO incident.


Cordially,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                  Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 02:31:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:15:39 -0500
Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space? - Velez


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 23:29:17 EST
 >Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 18:22:48 -0500
 >>From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:35:51 -0500
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: NASA's Future Role In Space?

 >>>Has anyone ever actually asked Spielberg to confirm this
 >>>story? I spent twenty minutes trying to track down an
 >>>e-mail address for either Spielberg's offices or
 >>>Dreamworks, I drew a blank on both. If anyone has a contact
 >>>address we could simply put the question to him and then see
 >>>if he chooses to respond.

 >>>After so many years, you'd think 'someone' would have tried
 >>>to confirm it by now. Does anybody know ?

 >>John;

 >>Well, I gave it a whirl last year by sending the following
 >>letter off. But as you can imagine, Mr. Spielberg is not an easy
 >>man to just pick up a phone and call. By the way, there was
 >>absolutely no response to the letter, hmpf!

 >On one hand the story came from Jamie Shandara whom claimed that
 >Spielberg whispered into his ear so to speak. On the other hand
 >Spielberg has chosen not to _deny_ the story even when he has
 >been given a number of chances over the years by letters and so
 >forth. If it never happened, Spielberg could easily deny it and
 >never break any private conversations he had with the President.

 >Apparently all we have is "Shandara said" and thats all.


Hi Robert, Kenny, All,

Kenny: I'm not surprised that you (or anyone else) never
received a response. (If) then president Reagan had whispered
something like the quote that is attributed to him into
Spielberg's ear, it would _probably_ bring nothing but grief for
him if he did cop to it in public. Spielberg hasn't gotten where
he'has in life by being shortsighted or stupid. It would mean
all the wrong kind of publicity for anyone wishing to maintain a
semblance of normalcy or sanity in their lives. (The man has a
family.)

Plus, it would mean dragging the name and reputation of a former
President (further complicated by the fact that he also happens
to be an Alzheimer's casualty) into the inevitable ensuing media
feeding frenzy. Not an appetizing prospect for a whistle-blower.
He would be attributing a statement (with monumental
implications) to a man who cannot answer for himself. Bad ju-ju
all around.

We all would like for Spielberg to tell us what the poop is, but
just as valid is the question; would anyone really blame him for
keeping his mouth shut given the circumstances? I know I
wouldn't.

As I said, (if) Reagan did say something like that, then I'm not
at all surprised that Spielberg would choose to keep it to
himself. Whether he is morally right or wrong for doing so is
another question/consideration entirely.

Robert: Given what we know of Shandera, there is little more we
can do other than to put it on a back-burner on the outside
chance that it may one day be corroborated by Spielberg himself.
For the reasons I gave above, I doubt that day will ever arrive
however. For now, we can file it away with the other
Presidential rumors that; Kennedy was about to reveal the truth
about alien visitors before he was shot; and the one about Nixon
having showed proof of alien life to Jackie Gleason.  ;)

The real meat on the table at the moment is the recently
released lunar Astronaut debriefings from NASA. I suggest that
our time is better spent following _that_ trail rather than any
that was left behind by the 'questionable' likes of Jaime
Shandera.  :)

The recent astronaut related revelations also kind of explains
why Herr Oberg - of the forked tongue - suddenly crawled out of
the woodwork, and why he is 'working' the UFO Lists so
diligently. "But he was here _before_ this story broke" I hear
some say.

Sometimes, 'timing' is everything says I.  :)

Hey NASA, got a mess in aisle 5? Send in the clean-up boy with
his trusty mop and broom. :)

The sad part is; every time one of these messenger-boys gets
caught in a lie - NASA denied the astronauts reported anything
'anomalous' at all for all of these years - only serves to
further erode what little is left of the public's trust in its
own institutions. Their lies degrade democracy and keep vital
information out of the human historical record. The real enemy
eats and sleeps among us.


Warm regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:41:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:20:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Finally, Ramey's teletype message, held in his hand while
 >Johnson was taking pictures, states that the next sent out press
 >release was going to be about weather balloons. The fix was in
 >before Newton ever arrived on the scene. He was brought in
 >strictly for show at the very end.

David,

The message held in Ramey's hand is unlikely to be a teletype
message.

The mechanics and instruction set of the teletype machines used
back then did _not_ include commands able to generate the line
feed mis-alignments observed in the text layout. The teletype
machines only had a LF command which incremented the paper by
one _full_ line at a time, there was no command to reverse this,
if you sent LF you were stuck on the next line down the paper.

Unlike computers that originally represented text using an 8bit
(now 16bit) code, the poor old teletype was ham-strung by
adopting early on a _5 bit_ code for all it's text and very few
control functions.

The Ramey Message shows _partial_ line feed mis-alignments both
down the page and then in the _reverse_ direction back up the
page. This _cannot_ be done with a vintage 1940's mechanical
teletype, I have a 1960's mechanical teletype and it cannot do
this action. Taking this into account I can only personally
conclude that the Ramey Message was the output from a _manual_
typewriter and the mis-alignments generated by the paper being
wound out, and then back in, inaccurately, while a typing error
was corrected.


Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:22:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >To Kevin, List, All:

 >Nice to see Bond Johnson still trying to peddle his, 'I
 >Photographed A Flying Saucer', tale yet again. Sort of
 >comforting. Must mean it's a new year. Hold on. Let me check my
 >calendar. Yep, it's 2002. Does it at least once a year, no
 >matter how many times it's shot down, or how silly he looks. The
 >"Little Engine That Could".


Tom,

In your haste you might not have noticed that (a) Bond wasn't
the person who posted the piece and (b) the piece itself is
dated 1998!.

 >Last year, against my better judgement, I engaged in a private
 >debate with one of the RPIT members - he shall remain nameless -
 >about Bond Johnson and the Ft. Worth photographs. A score or
 >e-mails were exchanged between us before, as expected, the RPIT
 >member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
 >guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
 >that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
 >might have been excised for economy's sake. To others - and no
 >doubt this was the intended impression - it conjures up images
 >of cutting and splicing different answers to different questions
 >that had been asked on the tape in order to alter intended
 >meanings. Not a good thing.

 >Attempting to get to the bottom of this charge - as I had heard
 >it several time before - I asked my RPIT member what exactly had
 >been "edited". Were the 'edits' at the paragraph, sentence,
 >word, morpheme or phoneme level? He claimed to have heard the
 >tapes, so I expected an informed reply. However, like the
 >chess-player who sees check-mate coming with the next move, he
 >simply ran and hid. I never heard from him again.

 >As with Roswell debunkers, there is a double standard at work
 >here. Pro-Roswell investigators must dot every possible 'i' and
 >cross every possible 't', or it doesn't count as evidence, while
 >the debunkers  - please don't refer to them as 'skeptics' - can
 >throw out stuff, have it shot down, then throw it out again and
 >again. As long as there is one, last, thin reed to cling to
 >- even if it's only in their own mind - the debunker will hold on
 >to the point of silliness. When that reed gives way, rather than
 >concede, they run away and hide.

In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
involved. But before we get sidetracked by this debate go back
and check out the details given by some major Roswell witnesses
and see how those have changed over time, ie Jesse Marcel
arrived back at RAAF late in the evening of the 8th according to
early interviews with Bill Moore _yet_ we now accept the later
details where he woke up his son around 1-2am.

I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but merely pointing out
witness testimony _has_ changed and no doubt will continue to do
so.  Bond Johnson is _not_ _alone_ in refreshing his memory of
events when given the time to think through 40 year old
recollections, I sometimes think some researchers expect total
recall on demand and take exception when it doesn't happen, but
it just doesn't work that way.

Bond Johnson has one major contribution, and _ only_one_ in the
Roswell Story and that _is__not_ his testimony to the events
(though interesting enough). It's simply the set of pictures he
took in Ramey's office that afternoon and which provide us with
an actual frozen moment in time from the event we're still
debating 50+ years later.

And remember the pictures don't rely on fuzzy memories, they
tell the same story they bore witness to the day they were
taken.


Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Chapman

From: Charles Chapman <charlesrc@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 03:58:01 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:27:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Chapman



 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 18:24:53 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >Tom Carey wrote:

 >>Last year, against my better judgement, I engaged in a private
 >>debate with one of the RPIT members - he shall remain nameless -
 >>about Bond Johnson and the Ft. Worth photographs. score or
 >>e-mails were exchanged between us before, as pected, the RPIT
 >>member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
 >>guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
 >>that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
 >>might have been excised for economy's sake. To others - and no
 >>doubt this was the intended impression - it conjures up images
 >>of cutting and splicing different answers to different questions
 >>that had been asked on the tape in order to alter intended
 >>meanings. Not a good thing.

 >Lets, just for fun, go through this "Randle edited the tapes"
 >crap one last time. Originally, a decade ago, after Dr. Johnson
 >changed his story and said that Ramey hadn't told him that the
 >debris was a weather balloon, that Ramey didn't know what it was
 >until after Dr. Johnson left his office, and the like was
 >claimed, I called Dr. Johnson to ask about it. When I read to
 >him from the transcripts, he said that he didn't remember saying
 >those things and didn't think he would have said them. For his
 >convenience, I made an edited version of the tapes so that he
 >could hear himself make the statements he said he didn't make. I
 >left in the context, the questions, and some of the subsequent
 >material so that Dr. Johnson could understand that I was not
 >taking his statements out of context or that I hadn't understood
 >what he said. Even with these "edits" the tape ran to more than
 >an hour.

 >Later, when Dr. Johnson began to say that I had edited the
 >tapes, implying that I had altered them, I sent to him a full
 >set so that the only breaks were where I had to turn the tapes
 >over. There were no edits and Dr. Johnson had, in complete form,
 >everything that I had. When he again said that I had edited the
 >tapes and started this nonsense I sent him another full set,
 >along with the correspondence between us, and other
 >documentation. I have since supplied that material to, at the
 >very least, two members of the RPIT without a comment by them.

 >So, yes, there was an edited tape, but nothing was altered. Dr.
 >Johnson had two complete sets of the tapes in which he says all
 >the things I have reported he said with no hint of a break or
 >edit in the most important of the material. He, and his RPIT can
 >hear him say all the things that he denies he said right up to
 >and including telling me, seven separate times, that he wrote
 >the July 9 article that appeared in the Star-Telegram, important
 >because the last paragraph tells us that Ramey had identified
 >the material as a weather balloon, in stark contrast to what Dr.
 >Johnson claims now. (Which also explains why he now denies that
 >he wrote the article.)

 >I think I have explained all this before, but Tom's email
 >suggested that maybe I should post it one more time. Dr.
 >Johnson's new stories are simply not supported by the evidence,
 >his taped interviews with me, and the documentation available. I
 >believe the problem for the RPIT is that if I am right, then
 >much of the work they have been doing is irrelevant.

Please forgive me for not doing a better job of "snipping" prior
text. I left it to provide complete and proper context for what
I have to say.

I would like to respectfully make a suggestion. It won't be
popular, but I am making it in good faith.

Kevin, I suggest you consult an attorney (or two) and consider
filing a lawsuit for slander and/or libel (and, if your attorney
suggests, prehaps for intentional infliction of emotional
distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, etc.). If
I were in your position, I would certainly consider filing such
a lawsuit.

I don't make this recommendation lightly, or to be overly
litgous. To me, it seems to be a simple matter. You have been
accused (directly and/or by necessary implication of fact) of
being dishonest regarding a clearly factual matter. People say
you edited tapes, presumably in order to mislead others. You say
you have not. (FWIW, I believe you). You have the tapes. They
can be examined. Presumably, an expert could examine the tapes,
and testify that they have not been cut, altered, or edited in
anyway.

I recommend you consider filing such a lawsuit not to make
money, but to preserve your reputation and, most importantly, to
establish the truth.

There is much in Ufolgy that is not verifiable and not subject
to any sort of final determination. This is.


-- Charles









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                  Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:33:53 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:53:15 -0500
Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - Oberg



 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 12:48 PM
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II

 >Collins:   No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't
 >            look like two connected rings. You could see this
 >            thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you
 >            could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow
 >            cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the
 >            sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book
 >            shape. It was really weird.

 >Aldrin:    I guess there's not too much more to say about it
 >            other than it wasn't cylinder.

 >Collins:   It was during the period when we thought it was a
 >            cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd
 >            almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be.
 >            But we don't have any more conclusions than that
 >            really. The fact that we didn't see it much past this
 >            one time period - we really don't have a conclusion
 >            as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how
 >            far away it was. It was something that wasn't part of
 >            the urine dump, we're pretty sure of that. Skipping
 >            ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we
 >            fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking
 >            rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM.
 >            It could have been some Mylar or something that had
 >            somehow come loose from the LM.

I've got some cool photos of S-4B stages drifting away from the
CSM/LM, if somebody wanted to post them somewhere folks could
inpsect them. The sunlit front end looks like a bright ring,
floating in front of the sun-glinted aft engine.

Without earthlight to fill in the dark shadows, they look
nothing like the S-4B closer in low earth orbit. Bizarre -- so
much so that one Brit UFO magazine even took an image with the
front ring, blew it up and cropped it, and featured it on the
cover of one issue as a genuine Apollo UFO.

Regarding other stuff flying by the windows, that was so common
the guys called them 'moon pigeons', and NASA even commissioned
a special investigation to analyze sightings to see which might
have any structural or safety implications. See:

http://members.aol.com/moonpigeons/ for the whole report.

Jim Oberg











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:25:42 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:55:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads


 >>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

  Neil, Tom, List, All -

 >Tom,

 >In your haste you might not have noticed that (a) Bond wasn't
 >the person who posted the piece and (b) the piece itself is
 >dated 1998!.

I think we all noticed that it was Ed who posted the piece,
though it reads as if it was something that Dr. Johnson had
written, using his curious style of first person and third
person narrative.

And yes, we also noticed that it was dated 1998 but it was just
posted to UpDates.

<snip>

 >In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >involved. But before we get sidetracked by this debate go back
 >and check out the details given by some major Roswell witnesses
 >and see how those have changed over time, ie Jesse Marcel
 >arrived back at RAAF late in the evening of the 8th according to
 >early interviews with Bill Moore _yet_ we now accept the later
 >details where he woke up his son around 1-2am.

We're not talking about slight modifications to the story told
by the witnesses, we're talking about outright contradictions.
Dr. Johnson told me, flat out, that General Ramey told him that
the debris was from a weather balloon. He said that several
times and believed that he had been duped by the military. Now
he says that General Ramey never told him it was a weather
balloon. This is a major alteration because it changes the story
and is not the same as saying I got home in the evening, or it
was one or two o'clock in the morning.

Dr. Johnson told me, at least seven times, that he had written
the July 9 article, that it was his, or it was his story in the
newspaper. After he came out with his new version, that General
Ramey didn't know it was a weather balloon, and I pointed out
that the last paragraph in that July 9 article confirmed that it
wasn't a weather balloon, Dr. Johnson changed his story.

He said, at one point that he had entered the empty office and
found the wrapped packages. He unwrapped them. When I asked if
he had rifled the desk, too, the story changed to he and Colonel
DuBose unwrapping some of the packages... which suggests, not a
change in a foggy memory, but a change because the original tale
was so outrageous that we didn't believe it.

Yes, the photographs exist and we can examine them, but the
information contained in them is limited. We have the tales told
by Dr. Johnson, which seem to be in conflict with the testimony
of many others (Jesse Marcel, Sr., Irving Newton, Thomas DuBose
and himself) changing all the time to place him into the center
arena. There is no reason to accept the later versions of his
tales, and that tends to taint everything that he touched. In
the end, there are only the photographs, and any information he
provides about the how and why of them must be viewed with a
skeptical eye.

I also find it interesting that as the tapes circulate, there is
a distancing from Dr. Johnson. What he said to me is not really
all that important now. Well, people's stories do change in
repeated telling. What he said to me is irrelevant.

My point here is that his story changed, radically (and once
again I wish we could use all caps because I would shout
radically) and that has rendered what he said about his
experiences in Ramey's office moot. He could have provided us
with some interesting insight. Instead we get his fantasies.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 14

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:32:58 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:57:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >David (and Tom Carey please feel free to weigh in),

 >Let me see if I've got this straight.

 >Marcel accompanied real Roswell debris to Fort Worth.

 >Ramey, knowing it was on the way, ordered up some ordinary
 >balloon debris to display in his office in its place.

 >Where did he get this ready-made debris on such short notice?
 >After all, it's not likely that he could just turn to an aide
 >and say go out back of Hangar B and bring me back some balloon
 >(and presumably Rawin) debris. And make it pronto.

Hi Dennis, List, All -

If you don't mind me weighing in here, let me point out that I
think Ramey could, actually, turn to his aide and say get me
some balloon debris... and no, given the timing and the fact
that Newton was off-duty in the afternoon, they wouldn't have
called him.

I asked Newton about this. If he would know where to find the
balloon and rawin target and he said yes, so I presume that the
other weather officers would know. Newton suggested Lawton, OK,
think Fort Sill, home of the Artillery... the balloons and
target would have been used by them for artillery practice. Or,
even Roswell because the balloons and target were used in atomic
testing and Roswell had been the logistical center for Operation
Crossroad.

And yes, it would have been no trouble for Ramey, a general, to
order one of the balloons and targets brought to Fort Worth,
assuming that nothing he needed was available locally. So, I
have never had a problem with his locating and retrieving a
balloon and target to display on the floor.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Alfred's Odd Observation #004

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:36:24 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 01:58:22 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Observation #004


Alfred's Odd Observation #004 (Monday -- January 14, 2002)

...Nothing visual to report this iteration. The weather has not
cooperated with a sufficiently clear enough sky, and the days
with the requisite sky have not yielded anything other than the
frustratingly mundane...

...But what I have instead, by way of observation, is an excerpt
from Jacques Vallee's "Anatomy of a Phenomenon" that seems
amazingly prescient given its lucid predictions regarding the
consequences involved with our continuing lack of scientific
courage... Dr. Vallee, remember, is the "Beethoven" of classical
Ufology, has never been discredited, and is a TRUE scientist.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A NEW SYSTEM OF WORKING HYPOTHESES (from page 194)

We should probably stop here, having shown that none of the
present interpretations of the UFO phenomena is fully
satisfactory; we would thus stay on the safe side of .the fence.
However, we feel we must complete this chapter by stating where
our own system of ideas tends to stand between the various
theories we have reviewed. We are assuming, of course, that it
is understood that the system is purely speculative in nature.
We would summarize it under the following seven points:

(1) It is scientifically permissible to work under the general
hypothesis that UFOs are material objects, not excluding the
possibility of their being non-human vehicles. There is no
reason only theories based on the idea that the senses of all
witnesses have been abused should bear the stamp of scientific
consideration. On the contrary, the hypothesis that the authors
of reports have indeed been in visual contact with physical
objects, possibly behaving under intelligent control, leads to
an analysis of the UFO phenomenon that lacks neither objectivity
nor consistency.

(2) Under such a hypothesis, the fact that the "controlling
intelligence" could not belong to any of the communities which
are present today on our planet would be shown by the permanence
of UFO activity through changing phases of our technology and
even, possibly, through early phases of our historical
development.

(3) Historically, it would be difficult to determine a starting
point for this activity, even if considered artificial in
nature. The only fact clearly visible from the data we have is
that UFO activity almost ceased between 1914 and 1946 but was
considerably renewed in May of 1946. It has been present ever
since, with a significant decrease in amplitude since 1958.

(4) If the hypothesis that UFO phenomena are manifestations of a
controlling intelligence finds serious confirmation in years to
come, through research or otherwise, we feel that one should
then accept the idea that UFO operators have been seen on the
ground on several occasions.

(5) Under such circumstances, we would expect intellectual
contact to be possible, owing to the fact that human concepts
seem in our observation, to be applicable to UFO behavior, but
we would continue to reject the claim of particular individuals
that they have been "contacted" and a1- lowed to know the origin
of the "visitors".

(6) In a discussion concerning the "purpose" of UFO activity we
would point out:

   a) that technological development on earth is now such that
   we are able, at least in theory, to reach any point in the
   universe which lies within our visual range, having thus
   overcome the handicap of creatures that can live only on the
   surface or very close to the surface of a planetary body;

   b) that UFO activity was suddenly renewed after World War
   II, when both rocket and aircraft technology had reached a
   point where space travel could be realistically visualized;

   c) that a particular peak of activity, quite unlike other
   waves, took place in 1957 when Sputniks I and II were
   launched into orbit.

(7) It is our opinion that a dispassionate, scientific debate
could be established concerning the UFO phenomenon, and that
such a discussion could well be conducted within the boundaries
set by rationalism for the purpose of objective acquisition of
knowledge. The various points involved in the present arguments
over the nature of this phenomenon could then be checked by
reference to a system of catalogues of observations, very often
of high reliability, that falls within the competence of the
professional scientist. The existing files, kept up-to-date by
official services in this country and by a few reliable amateurs
abroad, would provide a basis for the establishment of a general
investigation of this type. If, however, these documents and the
underlying phenomenon they manifest should be neglected by
professional scientists, only obscurantism and charlatanism
would be encouraged. Such an attitude would lead to the
generation of myths that could constitute a danger when the
sociological impact of space exploration reaches its full
strength.

Through UFO activity, although no physical evidence has yet been
found, some of us believe the contours of an amazingly complex
intelligent life beyond the earth can already be discerned. The
wakening spirit of man, and the horrified reaction of his
too-scrupulous theories: what do they matter?

Our minds now wander on planets our fathers ignored. Our senses,
our dreams have reached across the night at last, and touched
other universes. The sky will never be the same again.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It seems that Dr. Vallee might understand something about real
epiphany... this is especially obvious when one remembers that
the preceding was written prior to 1965... The last paragraph,
especially, is truer now today than it ever has been!

Read on!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:06:04 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:01:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

<snip>

 >>The point is that he would not know, for certain, that it is
 >>what Marcel brought from Roswell because he wasn't there when
 >>the material arrived. This point, however, is important to Dr.
 >>Johnson who makes the claim that some of the real debris was in
 >>among the bits of the weather balloon debris.

 >Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
 >some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
 >that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

Sorry, but then you would be wrong. You can even see the
darkened balloon envelop in the some of the pictures. Clearly,
the debris is of a Rawin target and a neoprene balloon.

 >>>He says he has said this over and over for years to
 >>>interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
 >>>ignored his statements.

 >>This is blatant "Bondism". I have accurately reported exactly
 >>what Newton told me and I have the tapes to back it up. I have
 >>letters in which I have asked him for clarification of his
 >>report and I have reported on that as well. There is nowhere
 >>that I have ignored his statements, Dr. Johnson's allegation to
 >>the contrary.

 >These are Newton's words to Bond. Bond can't help that Newton is
 >feeling ignored.

Unless you have heard a tape, then we don't know these are
Newton's words. Dr. Johnson has a long history of
misunderstanding what people have said to him and he has
reported these inaccuracies. I point to his "press release"
talking of some sort of special exhibit of the photographs and
his suggestion the Air Force and the UTA had words, which was
not proved by research conducted by others. I also have a letter
from Jesse Marcel, Jr. in which Dr. Johnson misquoted him.
Without a tape, what we have are Dr. Johnson's interpretation of
Irving Newton's words and that is a world of difference.

For those interested in the specifics, I note that Robert Durant
sent a copy of his  letter from UTA which said in part, "You
mention in your letter that Mr. (sic) Johnson has said that an
agency of the U.S. government engaged in a 'dispute' with UTA
re these photos. That simply is not true. There was no
dispute..."

For those interested in Jesse Marcel, Jr. I point you to
Updates, May 29, 1998, subject "Roswell Photos." Stan Friedman
(who has now incurred Dr. Johnson's wrath as well) wrote, "I
have been in close touch with Dr. Jesse A. Marcel over the last
few days re these pictures. Bond has very unfortunately vastly
overstated what Jesse says. He has NOT said that anything in the
pictures looks like the I-beam and symbols and other wreckage he
saw in 1947."

So, I say again because I believe it bears repeating, that we
don't know that those were Irving Newton's words because we have
no evidence that he said them. We have Dr. Johnson's
interpretation of those words which, given his past history, is
probably exaggerated.

<snip>

 >>And interestingly, Dr. Johnson has claimed that he was the only
 >>reporter to go to Ramey's office and speak with him, newspaper
 >>reports and other evidence to the contrary.

 >When Bond took the photos, there were no other reporters in the room.
 >Do you have evidence that there were others?

No one said there were other reporters in the room when Dr.
Johnson took the pictures. The point is that other reporters,
from other news media were in Ramey's office that afternoon and
evening. David Rudiak has posted the evidence as it has appeared
in various newspapers. We also have Colonel DuBose's statements
about other reporters, as well as statements by Jesse Marcel,
Sr. and Irving Newton. What more is required to suggest that
there were other reporters, at a different time, in General
Ramey's office.

 >>Colonel DuBose
 >>(later brigadier general) said that there were four or five
 >>reporters in the room asking questions. Since DuBose would have
 >>known the officers present, all of whom would have been in
 >>uniform and thereby identifying themselves as officers, those
 >>DuBose thought were reporters were in civilian clothes and
 >>unknown to him. Given the circumstances, it's clear that these
 >>men were reporters, some of whom worked for radio stations. Dr.
 >>Johnson has confirmed for us that other reporters did, in fact,
 >>interview General Ramey, contrary to what Dr. Johnson now
 >>claims.

 >Who were those reporters? What is your evidence?

See above. But more important, why do you reject the testimony
of all those others who were there, and the documented evidence
from various newspapers?

 >>Finally we have this last little bit of invention in an attempt
 >>to confirm that some "real" debris was in the room. In no other
 >>interviews had Newton ever suggested he remembered strange
 >>figures on the balloon.

 >I don't dispute this but that doesn't mean that he didn't say
 >this to Bond.

Given Dr. Johnson's history, I think it does.

<snip>

 >>This is not to mention that I find it difficult to believe that
 >>a major would walk into a general's office and toss his hat and
 >>tie onto the radiator. If Marcel had removed his tie, he would
 >>have stuffed it into his pocket and since the hat is soft cloth
 >>and relatively small, he could have done the same thing with it.
 >>Military protocol suggests that Marcel keep his personal items
 >>grouped together and not tossed around the office.

 >Bond was speculating and you are too. There are no answers to
 >these questions.

Actually, all we have to do is look at military customs and
military protocol for the answer. It is unlikely that the hat
and the tie belonged to Major Marcel. It is much more likely
that they were General Ramey's property. Those of us who had
served in the military understand this, those who have not seem
to fail to understand basic military courtesy.

 >>>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >>This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >>photographs were shot and nothing more.

 >Maybe and maybe not. Careful inventory and description of all
 >material in all photos would settle this question.

And from the analysis that I have conducted, using some of the
best equipment available, there is nothing to suggest that
debris had been removed. It's the same stuff that was there when
Dr. Johnson took his six photographs... and wouldn't the
existence of this seventh photograph, printed in newspapers
around the country provide some evidence of other reporters in
General Ramey's office?

<snip>

 >>In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
 >>Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
 >>"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
 >>on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
 >>knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
 >>side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
 >>Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
 >>pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
 >>found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
 >>pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
 >>debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

 >If the material on Ramey's carpet is not the material from
 >Roswell, then what is it? It's not a RAWIN. If it's not a RAWIN,
 >what is it? Where is your evidence that it is a weather balloon,
 >other than the story of a switch. Why not take a close look at
 >the photos and try to determine just what is on the carpet?

Simple. It is the remains of a weather balloon and rawin radar
target. The balloon is visible and the debris is easily
recognized as the remains of a degraded target.

 >The only hard evidence we have are the photos.

 >Your disagreements with Bond are irrelevant to the main issue:
 >what is the nature of the debris?

It is relevant in that it provides us was a glimpse into the
data supplied by Dr. Johnson. The debris is a balloon and
target.

 >Why are you so reluctant to participate in an in depth
 >discussion of these photos?

What is this about? I have participated in long and involved
research into the debris shown in the photographs. I know what
it is and I believe that most others on this list understand
what it is.

 >You and I both agree that Marcel didn't misidentify and then
 >carry a weather balloon and radar target from Roswell to FW. We
 >both agree that the Roswell debris that Marcel found was very
 >unusual and probably "alien". Our main disagreement is whether a
 >radar target and weather balloon were substituted for the debris
 >that Marcel carted to FW. If that's the case, you should be able
 >to identify the type of target and balloon. And the other debris
 >on the carpet should be easily identified as being from some
 >mundane assemblage of objects that we'd expect the General would
 >have readily available for the substitution. These include I
 >beams, various wires and connectors, and many other parts and
 >gizmos that are not normally associated with passive weather
 >balloons and radar reflectors.

According to Irving Newton, the material is from a weather
balloon and rawin target. I asked Newton if he knew where to get
a balloon and he told of a number of locations, all easily
within reach of General Ramey. Given that he was the commanding
officer of the 8th Air Force and given that he commanded any
number of aircraft and given that he could authorize flying
missions, it would not have been difficult for him to find and
fly in a degraded weather balloon and radar target (which is not
to say that he did it himself but had a staff officer do it).

Like others, I see nothing in the pictures that suggest anything
other than a weather balloon and I have looked at the various
websites and other evidences offered and have seen nothing there
that would alter my opinion.

So, that's where we are. I do not believe the information
supplied by Dr. Johnson and I can offer example after example of
his misstatements and confabulations. I believe that we have
proven, time and again, that there were other reporters in
General Ramey's office (though not when Dr. Johnson was there)
and that my interviews with him prove my points. I know that
others grow tired of these discussions that cover the same
ground, but as Tom pointed out in his posting, it matters not
what we offer in the way of proof, it matters not what evidence
is presented, there are those who simply will not understand the
truth when they see 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                       Re: Roswell Threads - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:17:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:04:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Salvaille


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads


 >>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >involved. But before we get sidetracked by this debate go back
 >and check out the details given by some major Roswell witnesses
 >and see how those have changed over time, ie Jesse Marcel
 >arrived back at RAAF late in the evening of the 8th according to
 >early interviews with Bill Moore _yet_ we now accept the later
 >details where he woke up his son around 1-2am.

 >I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but merely pointing out
 >witness testimony _has_ changed and no doubt will continue to do
 >so.

<snip>

Huh?

Unacceptable.

Truth should stand by itself. You make it a two party position
and wash your hands of the responsibility you have to step in.

KRandle is being accused by JBJohnson of not telling the truth,
of doctoring tapes to discredit Johnson. All this could be
(finally) cleared up with evidence already available: tapes.

Who _is_ telling the truth? Who _is_ falsely accusing whom?

Now, I understand that somebody as serious as yourself, Neil,
engaged in a quest for _truth_, wouldn't hesitate to give us the
real story.

No?

If Randle was at fault, would you tell us?

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:55:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:12:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy


 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>>[GCI] radar.

Hello, all. Michel

I am curious, did any UFO reports exsist for that time period?
Also, as I have pointed out in an earlier post the F-89C had
some structural deficentices that could have contributed to the
demise of the Aircraft.

 >><snip>

 >>It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >>the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >>when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >>villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >>A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >>pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

The F-89 driver has an O2 mask, the backseater too and used
them. I believe the cockpit was pressurized also.

The on-board radar was just for targeting, the theory was to get
a fix by ground control then aquire the target with the
realtivley primitive targeting radar. The pilot and backseater
may have seen nothing. The range of that radar was in miles, 25
miles sitcks in my mind as the absolute max.

 >>How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >>Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >>car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >>cause disaster?

Jets operate without a continuously running ingition system,
air in one end compression of fuel and air in the middlle,
thrust and exhaust out the back. But lack of oxygen would
definitely do it.

Also, if the '89 had become unstable for any reason, the relative
wind into the intake got disturbed (the F-14 Tomcat had a
problem with this too.) you could get a flameout.

The F-89C was as prone to flameout as the allison J-35 was one
of the poorer performers of the early generation jet engines,
(The CF-100 by the by,did the same thing as the F-89, but was a
much better aircraft.)

 >Funny how the facts of this case are biting you guys on the ass,
 >and still... you keep chomping at the bit.

 >Another case of re-hashing... and re-appointing an alternative
 >explanation to a classic UFO incident.

Well, Michel this is an incident that could be explained by some
rather prosaic means, if you call a large methane bubble
prosaic.

Mainly due to the nature of the allweather interceptor business,
and the quite real threat of the Soviet Union, there were
corners cut in getting the F-89 on line, I callled a friend of
mine, an ex-F-89 backseater, and he said the C had flameouts and
he had the pleasure of ending up in the drink in the North
Atlantic of a dual flame out operating out of Reykavic, Iceland,
on his last tour with the '89. This in good weather, and no
turbulence, and everyone who flew in the C model had delveloped
and eye for skin wrinkes in the vicinity of the tail and wing
attachments.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

               CCCRN News: Report & Media Archive Updates New

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 16:54:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:13:48 -0500
Subject: CCCRN News: Report & Media Archive Updates New



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

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

January 14, 2002

_____________________________


REPORT AND MEDIA ARCHIVE UPDATES, NEW WEB LINKS

The formation report archives have been updated on the web site,
for 2001, 2000, 1997-1995, 1980s, 1970s, 1960s and 1950s. A
number of reports added, plus the archives are being reformatted
somewhat, to provide quicker access to photos, diagrams and
field reports separately for each formation where available.

Additional updates to be added soon, as time allows me to do so.
In my own archives, there are currently about 170 reports, going
back to the 1960s and earlier, including 'standard' crop
circles, pasture / grass circles, ice rings, forest rings, etc.
Even 10' tall cattle corn, blueberry plants, hollyhocks and
tobacco plants, to name some of the more unusual places circles
have turned up in. All will be added to the web site, for as a
complete as possible record of these phenomena in Canada.

The media archives have also been updated for 2001, 2000,
1997-1995 and 1970s, including a link from each report archive
page to provide a reference to relevant media stories for that
year.

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

There are also a couple new web links for your interest:

Crop CircleAnswers.com
(Ed and Kris Sherwood, who will also be my next guests on the Fields of
Dreams radio show on February 6)

http://www.cropcircleanswers.com

Cosmic Artist CD Rom
(Colin Andrews)

http://www.cosmicartistcd.com


____________________________


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

To subscribe to CCCRN News, send a blank e-mail to:
cccrnnews-subscribe@topica.com

To unsubscribe from CCCRN News, send a blank e-mail to:
cccrnnews-unsubscribe@topica.com

Or go to:

http://www.topica.com/lists/cccrnnews

CCCRN News Archive:
http://www.topica.com/lists/cccrnnews/read


The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is a non-profit
research organization which investigates the crop circle
phenomenon and other possibly related phenomena in Canada,
creating a liason between researchers, farmers, the public, the
media and scientists in trying to solve this ongoing enigma.

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

=A9 Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 2002








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                     Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.14.02

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 16:41:02 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:15:48 -0500
Subject: Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.14.02


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

January 14, 2002

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
1.14.02


Earth Escapes Brush with Monster Asteroid
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/07/killer.asteroid/index.html

Object Near Sunlike Star Caught on Camera
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/07/brown.dwarf/index.html

Planet Found Around Giant Star Gives Clues to Earth's Fate
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/planet_found_020108.html

Kepler: The Search is On
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_kepler_020110.html

One-Stop Shop for Planet Discoveries Unveiled
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/09/planet.news/index.html

Happy Navigators Prepare to Say "Goodnight and Goodbye" to Odyssey's
Successful Aerobraking
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/aeroendAll.html

Beyond Contact: A Guide to SETI and Communicating with Alien
Civilizations
http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books/library_mcconnell_020111.html

'Alien' Message Tests Human Decoders
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=3Dns99991757

True Color of the Cosmos Revealed
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/10/color.cosmos/index.html

Dark Matter: Hidden Mass Confounds Science, Inspires
Revolutionary Theories

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/cosmic_darkmatt_020108-1.htm=
l

Antimatter Could Fuel Rockets, Heal Patients
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/10/antimatter.research/index.html

Freeing Gases For Cheap Fuel Cells With Orbiting Laser Cannons
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/laser_hydrogen_020109-1.h=
tml


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project,
providing the latest news, reports and updates, including
the Weekly Briefing, sent free to your e-mail.

To subscribe to Eras News, send a blank e-mail to:
erasnews-subscribe@topica.com

To unsubscribe from Eras News, send a blank e-mail to:
erasnews-unsubscribe@topica.com

Or go to:

http://www.topica.com/lists/erasnews

Eras News Archive:
http://www.topica.com/lists/erasnews/read


The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies project focusing
on 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.

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

=A9 The Eras Project, 2002









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:53:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:21:53 -0500
Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II - Velez


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II - Oberg
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:33:53 -0600

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >>Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 12:48 PM
 >>Subject: UFO UpDate: What Did Apollo 11 Crew See? - II

 >>Collins:  No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't
 >>look like two connected rings. You could see this
 >>thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you
 >>could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow
 >>cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the
 >>sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book
 >>shape. It was really weird.

 >>Aldrin:  I guess there's not too much more to say about it
 >>other than it wasn't cylinder.

 >>Collins:  It was during the period when we thought it was a
 >>cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd
 >>almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be.
 >>But we don't have any more conclusions than that
 >>really. The fact that we didn't see it much past this
 >>one time period - we really don't have a conclusion
 >>as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how
 >>far away it was. It was something that wasn't part of
 >>the urine dump, we're pretty sure of that. Skipping
 >>ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we
 >>fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking
 >>rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM.
 >>It could have been some Mylar or something that had
 >>somehow come loose from the LM.

 >I've got some cool photos of S-4B stages drifting away from the
 >CSM/LM, if somebody wanted to post them somewhere folks could
 >inpsect them. The sunlit front end looks like a bright ring,
 >floating in front of the sun-glinted aft engine.

 >Without earthlight to fill in the dark shadows, they look
 >nothing like the S-4B closer in low earth orbit. Bizarre -- so
 >much so that one Brit UFO magazine even took an image with the
 >front ring, blew it up and cropped it, and featured it on the
 >cover of one issue as a genuine Apollo UFO.

 >Regarding other stuff flying by the windows, that was so common
 >the guys called them 'moon pigeons', and NASA even commissioned
 >a special investigation to analyze sightings to see which might
 >have any structural or safety implications. See:

 >http://members.aol.com/moonpigeons/ for the whole report.

 >Jim Oberg


Hello Mr. Oberg,

The good news for you is; the kind of entrenched denial and
intellectual tunnel-vision that you suffer from is a completely
_treatable_ disfunction. :)

This testimony from _our_ own astronauts is as compelling as it
gets. None of the premature conclusions you can throw at it will
minimize its impact. What we have here, in spite of your
premature and pre-emptive attempt to explain it all away, is the
deeply intriguing and credible testimony of three highly trained
and highly skilled airmen and aeronautical engineers referring
to what they observed in space as "weird".

I find it highly significant that such bright, competent and
qualified people such as these are at such a loss for
descriptive words that they are compelled to resort to terms
like "weird" and "flying suitcases" when describing what they
witnessed in space. You seem to be the only one that is ready to
immediately pidgeon-hole and dismiss/explain away what the rest
of us consider to be truly _compelling_ expert witness
testimony.

No matter how fast you dance, or others may hate to admit it,
what these gentlemen reported was; 'seeing a UFO'. As in, it
remains an 'unidentified' flying object. Whether that 'thing'
was 'alien' in origin or not is something we'll never know. That
our astronauts reported seeing a 'UFO' is now beyond question.
Regardless of NASA's consistent denials or your squirming, a UFO
report is a UFO report. The bottom line is: NASA lied. There
_are_ reports of astronauts witnessing a UFO. Period. (And
nobody here is calling it an 'alien' craft.)

So, the language is clear, our astronauts _did_ report UFOs!
Interesting stuff. Gee, I wonder why NASA waited all these years
to release these records. Musta been out fear of all this wide
spread panic, looting and wild speculation we're seeing now that
it has finally been made public. :)

Brookings Institution Report my ass.


John Velez
Speaking strictly for myself










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:55:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:12:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy


 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>>[GCI] radar.

Hello, all. Michel

I am curious, did any UFO reports exsist for that time period?
Also, as I have pointed out in an earlier post the F-89C had
some structural deficentices that could have contributed to the
demise of the Aircraft.

 >><snip>

 >>It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >>the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >>when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >>villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >>A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >>pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

The F-89 driver has an O2 mask, the backseater too and used
them. I believe the cockpit was pressurized also.

The on-board radar was just for targeting, the theory was to get
a fix by ground control then aquire the target with the
realtivley primitive targeting radar. The pilot and backseater
may have seen nothing. The range of that radar was in miles, 25
miles sitcks in my mind as the absolute max.

 >>How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >>Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >>car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >>cause disaster?

Jets operate without a continuously running ingition system,
air in one end compression of fuel and air in the middlle,
thrust and exhaust out the back. But lack of oxygen would
definitely do it.

Also, if the '89 had become unstable for any reason, the relative
wind into the intake got disturbed (the F-14 Tomcat had a
problem with this too.) you could get a flameout.

The F-89C was as prone to flameout as the allison J-35 was one
of the poorer performers of the early generation jet engines,
(The CF-100 by the by,did the same thing as the F-89, but was a
much better aircraft.)

 >Funny how the facts of this case are biting you guys on the ass,
 >and still... you keep chomping at the bit.

 >Another case of re-hashing... and re-appointing an alternative
 >explanation to a classic UFO incident.

Well, Michel this is an incident that could be explained by some
rather prosaic means, if you call a large methane bubble
prosaic.

Mainly due to the nature of the allweather interceptor business,
and the quite real threat of the Soviet Union, there were
corners cut in getting the F-89 on line, I callled a friend of
mine, an ex-F-89 backseater, and he said the C had flameouts and
he had the pleasure of ending up in the drink in the North
Atlantic of a dual flame out operating out of Reykavic, Iceland,
on his last tour with the '89. This in good weather, and no
turbulence, and everyone who flew in the C model had delveloped
and eye for skin wrinkes in the vicinity of the tail and wing
attachments.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                              Ann Druffel Book

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:24:48 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:23:41 -0500
Subject: Ann Druffel Book


Ann Druffel wrote recently to say that her book, 'How To Defend
Yourself Against Alien Abduction', published in August 1998 by
Three Rivers Press/Random House, went out of print in a normal
fashion, but can still be ordered from book stores, the
publisher, etc. on a 'print on demand' basis. More and more
books are becoming available on this basis since the invention
of technology that makes it easy for the publisher to print them
individually, in small orders, or in larger orders.

If anyone is having trouble procuring a copy, they can write to
Ann personally and she will send them an autographed copy for a
special price of $9.50 (certified check or money orders only).

Ann's address is:

        257 Sycamore Glen,
        Pasadena,
        CA 91105,
        U.S.A.

Overseas buyers would be advised to contact Ann first to confirm
cost of postage.


Regards,

John Hayes

webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives for UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:36:40 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:25:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >David (and Tom Carey please feel free to weigh in),

 >Let me see if I've got this straight.

 >Marcel accompanied real Roswell debris to Fort Worth.

 >Ramey, knowing it was on the way, ordered up some ordinary
 >balloon debris to display in his office in its place.

 >Where did he get this ready-made debris on such short notice?
 >After all, it's not likely that he could just turn to an aide
 >and say go out back of Hangar B and bring me back some balloon
 >(and presumably Rawin) debris. And make it pronto.

On the morning of July 10, a demonstration of a Rawin being
launched was held at the Fort Worth base and covered by a
photographer from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. The caption of
the printed photo indicates the purpose was (as in the other
demonstrations held around the country) to debunk Roswell and
the recent multitude of saucer reports.

So where did Ramey get the Rawin for this demonstration?
Supposedly none was at the base.

In addition, an entire radar tracking trailer is shown in the
background of the 3 photos taken. That too wasn't supposed to be
at the base, according to weather officer Irving Newton.

So where did the radar trailer come from?

Either these items were already at the base or they were brought
in specifically for the debunking demonstration.

Despite proclamations to the contrary, Mogul wasn't the only
group using the Rawins. If they weren't at the base, one could
have been flown in quickly from some nearby location that did
use them. This was the Air Force after all.

Nearby locations known to have used the Rawins were White Sands,
Kansas City, and Fort Sill, OK. Fort Sill would be less than an
hour by plane; White Sands and Kansas City 2 hours.

The balloon could have come from anywhere. Hundreds were sent up
everyday from weather stations all over the country. Fort Worth
would have had them too. Or, it could have been brought in along
with the radar target.

And if the weather balloon story was pre-planned, then Ramey
would have had even more time to get his Rawin and balloon act
together.

 >In fact, if he needed some local stuff, you'd think the person
 >he would have ordered to produce it would be - you guessed it
 >- Irving Newton.

Newton was a forecaster and didn't handle the weather equipment.
He made that very clear to me. Balloons were launched by others.
(In fact, he surprised me by stating that he had embellished his
story for the press back in 1947 by claiming that he had
personally launched hundreds of the Rawins when overseas. Not
true, he said, others did the launchings--he used the data. He
"exaggerated" back then because it made for a better story.)

 >Just for the record, what do you and Carey think that stuff is
 >on Ramey's floor? And where do you think it came from?

For about the hundredth time, Dennis, I think the stuff on the
floor is an aluminum foil and balsa wood radar kite with a
weather balloon. I'm not with RPIT and their goofy stuff about
this being real saucer debris -- got it?

I can't tell you where Ramey got this stuff from (not even
Dubose knew that when asked). However, I can give you some good
arguments that this probably wasn't from Mogul.

Mogul #4 (supposedly the crash object according to debunkers)
consisted of about 2 dozen neoprene balloons, 3 radar targets
(though there is zero evidence that it actually had any radar
targets), and assorted payload and altitude control equipment.

1. Instruments: There are no instruments of any kind pictured in
the photos. Marcel and Cavitt report recovering no instruments
(except for a little black box Marcel said Cavitt found). In
1947, Ramey went on the radio and stated that there were no
instruments recovered. With no instruments, what exactly links
the Rawin and balloon to Mogul? The debris is indistinguishable
from an ordinary Rawin weather balloon.

2. Quantity of debris: Again despite assertions to the contrary,
there is insufficient debris to make up even one radar target
(e.g., the stick lengths computed by some photoanalyst for the
AF came up with less than half the sticks required to make up
one complete Rawin). Ramey or his people also repeatedly
referred to the debris as a singular balloon and target. A quote
of Ramey's from United Press in an evening edition of a west
coast newspaper on July 8 (which went to press before Irving
Newton ever came in) has Ramey stating that it appeared to be
the "remnants of a weather balloon and radar reflector." UP also
quoted Ramey that night as saying that a _part_ of a balloon was
found nearby.

Irving Newton in 1947 also referred to the debris as coming from
a singular balloon/reflector (as did the FBI telegram). When I
asked Newton in the present day whether there was more than one
balloon or radar target, he told me definitely not. He thought
the debris came from a regular Rawin weather balloon.

So where is the multi-balloon, multi-radar target Mogul? Again,
there is nothing here to clearly link the debris to Mogul in any
way.

3. Condition of debris: The balloon at Ramey's feet has
obviously been previously inflated (there are obvious stretch
marks) and looks aged and uneven in color, but it is still too
pristine and obviously pliable to have been a balloon that laid
out in the desert for a month. The sun deteriorated the neoprene
balloons to a brittle, flakelike status within about 2 to 3
weeks, as testified to and demonstrated repeatedly by Charles
Moore of Mogul. The balloon in Ramey's office, however, appears
to be relatively intact or at least in a few large pieces.

One interesting aspect of J.B. Johnson's earliest testimony was
his statement about the strong odor he immediately noticed when
he walked in Ramey's office. A balloon left in the desert sun
should not have had an odor after a month (the solvents in the
neoprene would have evaporated, the reason why the balloons got
brittle to begin with.) Here again, the odor suggests this
balloon hadn't weathered all that long.

As to the radar target, the white backing paper still looks very
white. None of the target looks weathered at all, even though it
should have been through a few N.M. summer thunderstorms after a
month (weather records, e.g., show thunderstorm activity on July
2 and July 4). Instead, it looks like a relatively pristine
radar target that somebody decided to shred a little bit.

There is nothing here at all to link this singular balloon and
singular Rawin to Mogul. It is instead a standard singular
balloon/radar target combination.

 >Moreover, what about that brown wrapping paper on the floor?
 >Didn't that come from Roswell? Why wasn't the real stuff simply
 >wrapped back up in the paper it came in and sent on its way?
 >That would be the expedient thing to do, assuming time was at a
 >premium.

The part of the brown wrapping paper comes from Robert Porter,
who accompanied Marcel on his flight.

However, if you examine Porter's testimony, he states that the
_largest_ wrapped package was triangular and only 3 feet on a
side. (A few more were shoebox size.)

The paper on Ramey's floor, however, extends for approximately
12 to 15 feet (it is piled up to the right and in uncropped
photos shows an additional 4 or 5 feet of paper along the right
edge). This is far more paper than needed to make up Porter's
package.

The paper also lacks the expected folds and crumpling one would
expect of a triangular package. Porter's triangular package was
sealed with tape, but there is no tape, and no tearing of the
paper, as one would expect if tape was pulled off.

Instead, the paper is almost completely smooth. It looks like
the broken up radar target may have been loosely rolled up
inside this paper (hence the lack of folds), or the target came
in something else and was dumped on the paper already laid out
on the floor.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:08:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:29:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:32:58 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >Hi Dennis, List, All -

 >If you don't mind me weighing in here, let me point out that I
 >think Ramey could, actually, turn to his aide and say get me
 >some balloon debris... and no, given the timing and the fact
 >that Newton was off-duty in the afternoon, they wouldn't have
 >called him.


Kevin,

Don't mind you weighing in at all... in fact, I welcome it.

 >I asked Newton about this. If he would know where to find the
 >balloon and rawin target and he said yes, so I presume that the
 >other weather officers would know. Newton suggested Lawton, OK,
 >think Fort Sill, home of the Artillery... the balloons and
 >target would have been used by them for artillery practice. Or,
 >even Roswell because the balloons and target were used in atomic
 >testing and Roswell had been the logistical center for Operation
 >Crossroad.

Well, yes, I suppose. But why would Lawton, Roswell, or anyone
else have on hand old balloon and rawin debris? Is this something
they routinely recovered or saved, and, if so, for what?

 >And yes, it would have been no trouble for Ramey, a general, to
 >order one of the balloons and targets brought to Fort Worth,
 >assuming that nothing he needed was available locally. So, I
 >have never had a problem with his locating and retrieving a
 >balloon and target to display on the floor.

 >Krandle

And why would Ramey order up these materials in the first place?
The original press release referred only to a recovered disk; it
was only much later that any detailed descriptions were given.

Ramey could have shown reporters a piece of tin in his office,
and no one would have been the wiser. So why go looking off-base
for something he could have ordered hauled out of the trash heap
at Carswell?

In other words, he could have shown and told reporters
*anything* and they would still have bought the story, as they
had no further details to go on.

So why go to any special trouble of ordering up a flight of
balloon and rawin debris from Lawton or anywhere else, when he
had no compelling reason to?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:30:17 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:32:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:41:00 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Finally, Ramey's teletype message, held in his hand while
 >>Johnson was taking pictures, states that the next sent out press
 >>release was going to be about weather balloons. The fix was in
 >>before Newton ever arrived on the scene. He was brought in
 >>strictly for show at the very end.

 >David,

 >The message held in Ramey's hand is unlikely to be a teletype
 >message.

Well think about the situation first, Neil. Would Ramey be
sending out updates by mail or using electronic communication
for speed?

 >The mechanics and instruction set of the teletype machines used
 >back then did _not_ include commands able to generate the line
 >feed mis-alignments observed in the text layout.

I honestly don't know what you mean here. What mis-alignments
are you referring to specifically? This was a mechanical impact
printer, not a laser printer, where everything comes out
perfectly aligned.

Misalignments in such printers are completely normal. Letters
aren't always exactly in line. Cases in point: check out Frank
Joyce's UP teletypes from July 8 or the FBI teletype of the same
day.

On top of this, the paper isn't flat. There are creases and
bends and warps in the paper and the letters are simply going to
"follow the terrain" in the projected image. The letters may
thus appear to dip below or rise above the others in the line
but really aren't. We don't have the original piece of paper to
flatten out.

There is additional variable in here as well. We are looking at
the image of the message on a photographic emulsion, not a piece
of paper. Emulsions can warp and stretch and tear, causing
additional misalignment. I don't think this is as important as
normal impact printer misalignment or terrain warp, but may be a
factor. (E.g., there appears to be a small vertical tear in the
emulsion at the top just right of center.)

 >The teletype
 >machines only had a LF command which incremented the paper by
 >one _full_ line at a time, there was no command to reverse this,
 >if you sent LF you were stuck on the next line down the paper.

 >Unlike computers that originally represented text using an 8bit
 >(now 16bit) code, the poor old teletype was ham-strung by
 >adopting early on a _5 bit_ code for all it's text and very few
 >control functions.

 >The Ramey Message shows _partial_ line feed mis-alignments both
 >down the page and then in the _reverse_ direction back up the
 >page.

Again, I really don't know what mis-alignments you are referring
to or why they can't be explained more economically by normal
impact printer mis-alignments and curvature in the paper.

 >This _cannot_ be done with a vintage 1940's mechanical
 >teletype, I have a 1960's mechanical teletype and it cannot do
 >this action. Taking this into account I can only personally
 >conclude that the Ramey Message was the output from a _manual_
 >typewriter and the mis-alignments generated by the paper being
 >wound out, and then back in, inaccurately, while a typing error
 >was corrected.

 >Neil

Needless to say, I totally disagree with you and think you are
drawing the wrong conclusion here.

Evidence that I think supports a teletype conclusion includes:

1. The time element: Ramey would be communicating electronically
    for speed.

2. All capital letters - No need to use all caps when using a
    typewriter, but no choice on a teletype machine.

3. Look carefully along the right edge of the paper and you'll
    see indications of regularly spaced sprocket holes.

4. The words "ARMY CABLE" at the very top center (followed
    immediately to right in very large letters by maybe
    "BELL CBL"


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                       Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:54:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:48:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger


 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

 >>>Would/could a cloud/bubble of methane gas reflect radar
 >>>emmissions back to the receiver? I ask for this reason. On more
 >>>than a few occassions aircraft have gone missing over the Great
 >>>Lakes. One of the more famous incidents is of course the USAF
 >>>F-89C out of Kinross AFB on Nov. 23,1953. The F-89C was observed
 >>>to merge with an unidentified target by Ground Control Intercept
 >>>[GCI] radar.

 >><snip>

 >>It wouldn't have to be methane. I saw a documentary on one of
 >>the UK cable channels in which an entire village was killed-off
 >>when a lake released a large amount of CO2, putting the
 >>villagers to sleep and eventually suffocating them.

 >>A similar discharge would stall the engines and render the
 >>pilots unconciouse. But, would it show up on radar?

 >>How about a highly charged ionised gas cloud, as in the Earth
 >>Lights theory? Surly that would/could stop the engines, as in
 >>car stop cases, and affect the instruments/controls enough to
 >>cause disaster?

 >Funny how the facts of this case are biting you guys on the ass,
 >and still... you keep chomping at the bit.

 >Another case of re-hashing... and re-appointing an alternative
 >explanation to a classic UFO incident.


Yeah, what's your point Michel? If you've got more than the
sketchy info I have, then dish it up. I have my own reasons for
eliminating other possibilities. Besides I haven't had a nice
nibble on my ass for some time now. I take what I can get.


With love and affection,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:43:14 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:52:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:11:06 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:25:17 -0800

 >>>Interview with Former Roswell Weatherman Irving Newton:

<snip>

 >>>Newton is _dead_certain_ that what was on the floor in Ramey's
 >>>office is what Marcel brought from Roswell.

 >>The point is that he would not know, for certain, that it is
 >>what Marcel brought from Roswell because he wasn't there when
 >>the material arrived. This point, however, is important to Dr.
 >>Johnson who makes the claim that some of the real debris was in
 >>among the bits of the weather balloon debris.

 >Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
 >some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
 >that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

I do not speak alone when I say that you guys are completely out
to lunch on this, particularly your statement that _none_ of the
debris is from a RAWIN radar target.

Do any of you guys even know how the things were constructed or
what they looked like?

I can show you photos of the Rawins from that time period with
the identical white paper backing to the aluminum foil wrapped
around the sticks forming a straight white seam, just as you see
in these photos. The sheets of foil paper made up triangles 2' x
2' x 2.8', again evidenced in the photos. The stick lengths and
dimensions are certainly consistent with those used to make the
targets.

 >>>He says he has said this over and over for years to
 >>>interviewers, and especially Randle and Friedman have simply
 >>>ignored his statements.

 >>This is blatant "Bondism". I have accurately reported exactly
 >>what Newton told me and I have the tapes to back it up. I have
 >>letters in which I have asked him for clarification of his
 >>report and I have reported on that as well. There is nowhere
 >>that I have ignored his statements, Dr. Johnson's allegation to
 >>the contrary.

 >These are Newton's words to Bond. Bond can't help that Newton is
 >feeling ignored.

No, Bond is trying to spin the story to this definitely being
the real Roswell debris and using Newton's hearsay, utterly
worthless opinions about "definite" Roswell origins to back this
up. Newton might have been _told_ the debris came from Roswell,
but he couldn't _know_ from first-hand knowledge that this came
from Roswell.

 >>>Newton seems to remember a few people in the office "taking
 >>>notes". He assumed them to be reporters. He was not too clear on
 >>>that point. It was not an especially momentous event for him. He
 >>>said that Major Marcel was there and followed him around the
 >>>office trying to get him to look at "some of the sticks" he was
 >>>holding and to see the strange symbols on them that Marcel
 >>>thought were "not of this world." He does recall seeing strange
 >>>random figures on some of these sticks.

So not the balloon debris per se - the sticks.

 >>Newton told me, and I believe it to be an important point, he
 >>did not know Marcel and was introduced to none of the men in the
 >>room he did not know. In other words, Newton has assumed that
 >>the man asking the questions was Major Marcel, but Marcel has
 >>said that he was ordered by Ramey not to open his mouth.
 >>Therefore, Marcel was not the major asking the questions and
 >>that officer was more than likely Major Charles A. Cashon,
 >>Ramey's public affairs officer. (Newton didn't know him either.)

 >Yes, this could be the case.
nd interestingly, Dr. Johnson has claimed that he was the only
 >>reporter to go to Ramey's office and speak with him, newspaper
 >>reports and other evidence to the contrary.

 >When Bond took the photos, there were no other reporters in the room.
 >Do you have evidence that there were others?

Yes, after he left, when he was no longer in the room. There is
no way Bond Johnson could know what happened in Ramey's office
either before or after he was there. So how does he conclude
there couldn't possibly have been reporters who followed him?

 >>Colonel DuBose
 >>(later brigadier general) said that there were four or five
 >>reporters in the room asking questions. Since DuBose would have
 >>known the officers present, all of whom would have been in
 >>uniform and thereby identifying themselves as officers, those
 >>DuBose thought were reporters were in civilian clothes and
 >>unknown to him. Given the circumstances, it's clear that these
 >>men were reporters, some of whom worked for radio stations. Dr.
 >>Johnson has confirmed for us that other reporters did, in fact,
 >>interview General Ramey, contrary to what Dr. Johnson now
 >>claims.

 >Who were those reporters? What is your evidence?

Evidence? How about:

1. The photo of Newton taken by a civilian wireservice agency.

2. Three witnesses (Newton, Dubose, Marcel) all independently
    reporting multiple reporters.

3. Quotations from Newton reported by Associated Press and
    United Press.

 >>Finally we have this last little bit of invention in an attempt
 >>to confirm that some "real" debris was in the room. In no other
 >>interviews had Newton ever suggested he remembered strange
 >>figures on the balloon.

 >I don't dispute this but that doesn't mean that he didn't say
 >this to Bond.

Newton's more recent claim is that he saw figures on the sticks
and Marcel tried to convince him they were unusual. Perhaps the
term "balloon" is being used a little too loosely here?

<snip>

 >>>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >>This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >>photographs were shot and nothing more.

 >Maybe and maybe not. Careful inventory and description of all
 >material in all photos would settle this question.

I agree with Kevin Randle. The Newton photo uses a camera angle
pointed to the left, showing the leftmost side of the brown
paper with debris on top and misses a little bit of the debris
to the right and out of the frame.  It also does not show most
of the debris below the paper and closest to the camera. The
Ramey/Dubose photos has the camera further back, pointed more
centrally, showing the complete collection of debris left and
right plus pieces "below" the paper and closest to the camera.
It's just a matter of camera angle.

The larger triangular piece with the stick attached being held
by Col. Dubose while seated in the central chair is now more to
the left and being held in Newton's left hand.  Marcel also has
hold of this larger piece with an attached stick. Newton has
grabbed one of the smaller pieces from the left side and is
holding it in his right hand.

Material has been moved around a little bit, but it's just looks
like ordinary posing for pictures.

I agree that a careful inventory would be very useful (in fact,
I am working on this now). So why the wild rhetoric from your
side of the aisle that the debris has been removed in the Newton
photo and thus "sanitized"? I see zero evidence of this. It just
more nonsense about how this obvious radar reflector debris
represents real saucer material.

<snip>

 >>>Conclusion:There are three people known to be living who
 >>>actually saw and touched the Roswell debris: Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>>Irving Newton and J. Bond Johnson. Marcel recalls his father
 >>>telling him that at least _part_ of the debris in Ramey's office
 >>>was the "real stuff." Newton is _dead_certain_ that the debris
 >>>on the floor of Ramey's office was the "real stuff" that Marcel
 >>>brought from Roswell. Johnson, after carefully and at length
 >>>interviewing Kevin Randle, Stan Friedman, Bill Moore, Jamie
 >>>Shandera, Philip Klass and other 'Roswell experts', has been
 >>>unable to unearth _any_ evidence whatsoever to support _any_
 >>>"switch" of the "real stuff." The "balloon switch" story must
 >>>have been pure fabrication of some of the Roswell writers!

 >>>--James Bond Johnson, Ph.D.
 >>>Phone-con With Irving Newton 8/15/98
 >>>Date: 98-08-15 20:24:22 EDT

 >>In conclusion, this is the same sort of nonsense that Dr.
 >>Johnson has been spouting since he decided that he handled the
 >>"real debris." While Irving Newton is certain that the material
 >>on the floor is the stuff brought from Roswell, he has no way of
 >>knowing that, other than what he had been told. On the other
 >>side, General DuBose said that the debris had been switched,
 >>Jesse Marcel, Sr. told reporter Johnny Mann, after examining the
 >>pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, "This is not the stuff that I
 >>found in New Mexico," and Jesse Marcel, Jr., after examining the
 >>pictures said that the stuff bore a gross resemblance to the
 >>debris he had seen, but it was not the same stuff.

 >If the material on Ramey's carpet is not the material from
 >Roswell, then what is it? It's not a RAWIN.

Yes, it definitely _is_ the remains of a RAWIN target! Everybody
but RPIT people clearly see that. It's aluminum foil with white
paper backing part of the balsa stick framework

 >If it's not a RAWIN, what is it?

No need to speculate here, since it is a RAWIN.

 >Where is your evidence that it is a weather balloon,
 >other than the story of a switch.

Why don't you give Irving Newton a call and ask him? I'm sure he
will give you an earful. This is one thing on which he can speak
with authority since he was a weather officer and also saw and
commented on the debris at the time. (He identified it as a
weather balloon and Rawin target, and continues to do so today.)

Maybe you should also study the engineering diagram of the Rawins and look at
the photos of identical Rawins.

 >Why not take a close look at
 >the photos and try to determine just what is on the carpet?

I have. It's a Rawin target.

 >The only hard evidence we have are the photos.

The only hard evidence of what Ramey allowed reporters to see,
not necessarily what was found at Roswell.

 >Your disagreements with Bond are irrelevant to the main issue:
 >what is the nature of the debris?

Aluminum foil, paper backing, balsa sticks, and a rubber balloon

 >Why are you so reluctant to participate in an in depth
 >discussion of these photos?

Nobody is reluctant. I know that I am tired of wasting my time
on the patently obvious, and I suspect other people are as well.

 >You and I both agree that Marcel didn't misidentify and then
 >carry a weather balloon and radar target from Roswell to FW. We
 >both agree that the Roswell debris that Marcel found was very
 >unusual and probably "alien". Our main disagreement is whether a
 >radar target and weather balloon were substituted for the debris
 >that Marcel carted to FW. If that's the case, you should be able
 >to identify the type of target and balloon.

The debris is consistent in dimensions and quantity with part of
an ML-307 model radar target. The balloon would be a neoprene
rubber balloon, probably 350 mg, the standard lofting balloon
for these targets. But that's a little hard to tell, since it's
just dumped in a heap on the floor.

 >And the other debris
 >on the carpet should be easily identified as being from some
 >mundane assemblage of objects that we'd expect the General would
 >have readily available for the substitution. These include I
 >beams, various wires and connectors, and many other parts and
 >gizmos that are not normally associated with passive weather
 >balloons and radar reflectors.

There were metal eyelets for the support twine and some small
metal connectors and hinges for the balsa sticks. Conceivably
those might be found somewhere in the photos.

However, I have looked over some very high resolution images and
have yet to see anything out of the ordinary here. I had hoped
maybe some "real" debris might have inadvertantly been left, but
I have never seen anything like that. It's just torn-up
foil/paper and some stick framework of a Rawin target.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Carey

From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:14:16 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:55:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Carey


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>To Kevin, List, All:

 >>Nice to see Bond Johnson still trying to peddle his, 'I
 >>Photographed A Flying Saucer', tale yet again. Sort of
 >>comforting. Must mean it's a new year. Hold on. Let me check my
 >>calendar. Yep, it's 2002. Does it at least once a year, no
 >>matter how many times it's shot down, or how silly he looks. The
 >>"Little Engine That Could".


 >Tom,

 >In your haste you might not have noticed that (a) Bond wasn't
 >the person who posted the piece and (b) the piece itself is
 >dated 1998!.

Neil, List, All:

You are right. I did not pay as much attention to the posting
details as I did to the fact that I was reading J. Bond
Johnson's 'new version' as fact yet again. Seemed to me that it
keeps popping up in different venues with a fairly regular
frequency - this time by proxy. That's what I was reacting to.

 >>Last year, against my better judgement, I engaged in a private
 >>debate with one of the RPIT members - he shall remain nameless -
 >>about Bond Johnson and the Ft. Worth photographs. A score or
 >>e-mails were exchanged between us before, as expected, the RPIT
 >>member tossed out the "Randle edited the tapes", charge. My
 >>guess - without hearing the tapes - was that extraneous talk
 >>that had nothing to do with the main topic under discussion
 >>might have been excised for economy's sake. To others - and no
 >>doubt this was the intended impression - it conjures up images
 >>of cutting and splicing different answers to different questions
 >>that had been asked on the tape in order to alter intended
 >>meanings. Not a good thing.

 >>Attempting to get to the bottom of this charge - as I had heard
 >>it several time before - I asked my RPIT member what exactly had
 >>been "edited". Were the 'edits' at the paragraph, sentence,
 >>word, morpheme or phoneme level? He claimed to have heard the
 >>tapes, so I expected an informed reply. However, like the
 >>chess-player who sees check-mate coming with the next move, he
 >>simply ran and hid. I never heard from him again.

 >>As with Roswell debunkers, there is a double standard at work
 >>here. Pro-Roswell investigators must dot every possible 'i' and
 >>cross every possible 't', or it doesn't count as evidence, while
 >>the debunkers  - please don't refer to them as 'skeptics' - can
 >>throw out stuff, have it shot down, then throw it out again and
 >>again. As long as there is one, last, thin reed to cling to
 >>- even if it's only in their own mind - the debunker will hold on
 >>to the point of silliness. When that reed gives way, rather than
 >>concede, they run away and hide.

 >In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >involved.

I hope that you are not holding your breath. It's in JBJ's
self-interest that it not be resolved.

 >But before we get sidetracked by this debate go back
 >and check out the details given by some major Roswell witnesses
 >and see how those have changed over time, ie Jesse Marcel
 >arrived back at RAAF late in the evening of the 8th according to
 >early interviews with Bill Moore _yet_ we now accept the later
 >details where he woke up his son around 1-2am.

You are comparing a slight modification to an account based upon
the memories of two people that maintains its integrity to a
totally opposite account of the same event given by the same
witness. I don't think so.

 >I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but merely pointing out
 >witness testimony _has_ changed and no doubt will continue to do
 >so.  Bond Johnson is _not_ _alone_ in refreshing his memory of
 >events when given the time to think through 40 year old
 >recollections, I sometimes think some researchers expect total
 >recall on demand and take exception when it doesn't happen, but
 >it just doesn't work that way.

His drastic change of story goes beyond the refreshing point.

 >Bond Johnson has one major contribution, and _ only_one_ in the
 >Roswell Story and that _is__not_ his testimony to the events
 >(though interesting enough). It's simply the set of pictures he
 >took in Ramey's office that afternoon and which provide us with
 >an actual frozen moment in time from the event we're still
 >debating 50+ years later.

Right.

 >And remember the pictures don't rely on fuzzy memories, they
 >tell the same story they bore witness to the day they were
 >taken.

 >Neil

Right again, although I wish certain parts of the pictures were
a little less fuzzy.

Tom









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Carey

From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:34:47 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 02:57:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Carey


 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >David (and Tom Carey please feel free to weigh in),

 >Let me see if I've got this straight.

 >Marcel accompanied real Roswell debris to Fort Worth.

Right.

 >Ramey, knowing it was on the way, ordered up some ordinary
 >balloon debris to display in his office in its place.

Somebody ordered it. It just didn't appear by itself.

 >Where did he get this ready-made debris on such short notice?
 >After all, it's not likely that he could just turn to an aide
 >and say go out back of Hangar B and bring me back some balloon
 >(and presumably Rawin) debris. And make it pronto.

How do you know? Maybe he did. We will probably never know for
sure at this point. All we can do now is speculate where it
might have come from. I believe that Kevin thinks it might have
come from local stock at Ft. Worth. Bob Durant believes that it
might have come from Alamogordo, and I believe that it came from
Roswell on the Marcel flight [along with some of the real
stuff].

 >In fact, if he needed some local stuff, you'd think the person
 >he would have ordered to produce it would be - you guessed it
 >-Irving Newton.

 >Just for the record, what do you and Carey think that stuff is
 >on Ramey's floor? And where do you think it came from?

A deteriorating neoprene balloon and an off-the-shelf radar
target.

 >Moreover, what about that brown wrapping paper on the floor?
 >Didn't that come from Roswell?

Yes.

 >Why wasn't the real stuff simply
 >wrapped back up in the paper it came in and sent on its way?
 >That would be the expedient thing to do, assuming time was at a
 >premium.

 >Dennis Stacy

I'll be sure to ask Ramey and DuBose the next time I talk to them.

Tom Carey










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 15

                       Still Looking For Marshall Lee

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:45:24 -0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:23:10 -0500
Subject: Still Looking For Marshall Lee


Dear List Members:

I wonder if anyone on UFO UpDates can help me find information
about Marshall Lee, who I believe is an American UFO researcher,
lecturer and author. Apparently, he just published a book about
the Varginha Case in the US. Does anybody know him and/or have
any reference about his work? Any e-mail address or website?


Thanks!

A. J. Gevaerd, editor
Brazilian UFO Magazine










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 11:20:02 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:38:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:30:17 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:41:00 +0000
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 21:17:36 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>The message held in Ramey's hand is unlikely to be a teletype
 >>message.

 >Well think about the situation first, Neil. Would Ramey be
 >sending out updates by mail or using electronic communication
 >for speed?

David,

Electronic of course, but again what type of electronic and what
were the procedures. The US Army Signal Corp had been having
kittens since WWII that their teletype network like the
wireservices networks sent all their traffic in clear text,
stick a couple of croc-clips across the line, hook it to a slave
printer and you could read everything a base was sending and
receiving, _not_ a secure system what with the frost coming in
from the East. So throughout the late 40's they strove to find a
bolt on encryption system for their teletypes.

A successful system was only implemented in the early _1950's_
up until that time only non sensitive traffic was allowed on the
military teletype networks. So up until the early 1950's
_anything_ of a sensitive/security nature would be sent via RT
(radio telegraphy - Morse code) after being hand encrypted with
the code of the day out of the current handy dandy secret code
book. The original message was either hand or type written and
then submitted to the encryption section who manually encoded
the message into the usual 5-letter code groups which were then
typed out on coding sheets, these then went off to the radio
shack for transmission.

At the receiving end the radio shack took down the message in
code groups onto a coding sheet, this was then submitted to the
encryption section for decoding, the message was then _typed_
_out_ in decoded clear text ready for submission to the party it
was addressed to. I have seen this method of communication
referred to as "secure RT" in documents of the period, ie "
report by secure RT".

A further reason for the push to automate the encryption system
was all the man-power the manual system tied up and it was a
time consuming process but they stuck with it until they were
happy with the encryption teletypes which as I have said were
only introduced in a program which ran from aprox 1950-51
through to 1955. A few test installation were in place prior to
this but they were not assumed secure and were for
experimental/testing use only.

 >>The mechanics and instruction set of the teletype machines used
 >>back then did _not_ include commands able to generate the line
 >>feed mis-alignments observed in the text layout.

 >I honestly don't know what you mean here. What mis-alignments
 >are you referring to specifically? This was a mechanical impact
 >printer, not a laser printer, where everything comes out
 >perfectly aligned.

Exactly, these were mechanical printers that only did a very
limited range of operations, they only fed the paper one way,
and then a line at a time.

 >Misalignments in such printers are completely normal. Letters
 >aren't always exactly in line. Cases in point: check out Frank
 >Joyce's UP teletypes from July 8 or the FBI teletype of the same
 >day.

 >On top of this, the paper isn't flat. There are creases and
 >bends and warps in the paper and the letters are simply going to
 >"follow the terrain" in the projected image. The letters may
 >thus appear to dip below or rise above the others in the line
 >but really aren't. We don't have the original piece of paper to
 >flatten out.

Look at Line 2 from the centre fold to the right hand edge.

Word one is obviously on the curve of the crease but words 2,3
and 4 show a consistent line of text, if you use this as the
mean text line level and project a line along the bottom level
of the text to the right you will immediately notice word 5 and
word 6 ( TO and THE) _are_ _not_  on this meal level, TO
descends way below the mean level and though THE recovers
somewhat, it is still below the mean line level. Further we are
not referring to odd letters here but whole word groups being
displaced _together_. These are not whole line displacements but
sub-line, teletype machines of that vintage didn't do feeds of
less than a whole line and then in only one direction, the feeds
here go down the page and then up and both in sub line spacings.

 >There is additional variable in here as well. We are looking at
 >the image of the message on a photographic emulsion, not a piece
 >of paper. Emulsions can warp and stretch and tear, causing
 >additional misalignment. I don't think this is as important as
 >normal impact printer misalignment or terrain warp, but may be a
 >factor. (E.g., there appears to be a small vertical tear in the
 >emulsion at the top just right of center.)

The part line of text see directly above this displaced text
shows no such distortion, I would have thought that as we are
dealing with the emulsion on such a micro scale as with the
Ramey message the effects of such distortions would have been
seen there too and I would have also felt that such distortions
would have worked on a letter by letter basis _not_  neatly as
here, in _word_ _groups_.

 >>The teletype
 >>machines only had a LF command which incremented the paper by
 >>one _full_ line at a time, there was no command to reverse this,
 >>if you sent LF you were stuck on the next line down the paper.

 >>Unlike computers that originally represented text using an 8bit
 >>(now 16bit) code, the poor old teletype was ham-strung by
 >>adopting early on a _5 bit_ code for all it's text and very few
 >>control functions.

 >>The Ramey Message shows _partial_ line feed mis-alignments both
 >>down the page and then in the _reverse_ direction back up the
 >>page.

 >Again, I really don't know what mis-alignments you are referring
 >to or why they can't be explained more economically by normal
 >impact printer mis-alignments and curvature in the paper.

 >>This _cannot_ be done with a vintage 1940's mechanical
 >>teletype, I have a 1960's mechanical teletype and it cannot do
 >>this action. Taking this into account I can only personally
 >>conclude that the Ramey Message was the output from a _manual_
 >>typewriter and the mis-alignments generated by the paper being
 >>wound out, and then back in, inaccurately, while a typing error
 >>was corrected.

 >>Neil

 >Needless to say, I totally disagree with you and think you are
 >drawing the wrong conclusion here.
 >
 >Evidence that I think supports a teletype conclusion includes:
 >
 >1. The time element: Ramey would be communicating electronically
 >   for speed.

But also consider the security question, ie Blanchard's widow
recalled to Stanton F that Blanchard had said they thought some
of the marking on the debris could be Russian, if correct, would
this not immediately class the matter as a security issue?.

 >2. All capital letters - No need to use all caps when using a
 >   typewriter, but no choice on a teletype machine.
 >
 >3. Look carefully along the right edge of the paper and you'll
 >   see indications of regularly spaced sprocket holes.

Most teletype machines _didn't_  use tractor feed ie, sprocket
holes, they used roller feed as per a typewriter and plain
roles. Roles could be obtained as single copy or multiple copy
with interleaved carbon paper. I still have some of these in the
loft for my old Creed 7B machine.

Many machines also used punched paper tape as a compact
recording medium or intermediate storage format.

 >4. The words "ARMY CABLE" at the very top center (followed
 >   immediately to right in very large letters by maybe
 >   "BELL CBL"

Well we do differ on the reading of the text.


Neil










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:42:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:08:41 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:32:58 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:29:51 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 ><snip>

 >>Hi Dennis, List, All -

 >>If you don't mind me weighing in here, let me point out that I
 >>think Ramey could, actually, turn to his aide and say get me
 >>some balloon debris... and no, given the timing and the fact
 >>that Newton was off-duty in the afternoon, they wouldn't have
 >>called him.


 >Kevin,

 >Don't mind you weighing in at all... in fact, I welcome it.

Hi Dennis -

Thanks.

 >>I asked Newton about this. If he would know where to find the
 >>balloon and rawin target and he said yes, so I presume that the
 >>other weather officers would know. Newton suggested Lawton, OK,
 >>think Fort Sill, home of the Artillery... the balloons and
 >>target would have been used by them for artillery practice. Or,
 >>even Roswell because the balloons and target were used in atomic
 >>testing and Roswell had been the logistical center for Operation
 >>Crossroad.

 >Well, yes, I suppose. But why would Lawton, Roswell, or anyone
 >else have on hand old balloon and rawin debris? Is this something
 >they routinely recovered or saved, and, if so, for what?

I would think that, at Lawton, you could easily send out a bunch
of enlisted men who would search for just this sort of debris,
if you needed them to do that. This sort of debris wouldn't be
saved, but I think you could find it fairly easily... if you
needed a degraded balloon.

On the other hand, a brand new, out of the box rawin would do
fine because all you had to do was rip it up. The neoprene
balloons discolored if you looked at them wrong. Charles Moore
showed me one that he had kept in the box for many years and
even in that state it was slightly discolored.

 >>And yes, it would have been no trouble for Ramey, a general, to
 >>order one of the balloons and targets brought to Fort Worth,
 >>assuming that nothing he needed was available locally. So, I
 >>have never had a problem with his locating and retrieving a
 >>balloon and target to display on the floor.

 >>Krandle

 >And why would Ramey order up these materials in the first place?
 >The original press release referred only to a recovered disk; it
 >was only much later that any detailed descriptions were given.

Ah, but the second story, that appeared in the Roswell Daily
Record, the one that all debunkers are so fond of, gives a
description of the material. You have to match the debris with
the description and cover all the bases just in case some
reporter decides to ask a couple of new questions.

 >Ramey could have shown reporters a piece of tin in his office,
 >and no one would have been the wiser. So why go looking off-base
 >for something he could have ordered hauled out of the trash heap
 >at Carswell?

Actually, he couldn't show them just anything because when he
brought in Newton, the weather officer wouldn't have been able
to say, "Hey, that's a weather balloon and radar reflector..."
or something like that.

 >In other words, he could have shown and told reporters
 >*anything* and they would still have bought the story, as they
 >had no further details to go on.

Actually, he couldn't show them anything because someone might
have gotten cute and attempted to identify the *anything*. With
the weather balloon he has the bases covered.

 >So why go to any special trouble of ordering up a flight of
 >balloon and rawin debris from Lawton or anywhere else, when he
 >had no compelling reason to?

Actually, the special flight was already ordered and I think one
of the compelling reasons was to get Marcel the hell out of
Roswell. And, contrary to what Tom wrote, I think the rawin and
balloon came from Roswell. Robert Porter, who went to Fort Worth
on the flight with Marcel described materials being handed up,
into the cockpit that sound suspiciously like the radar
reflector and the balloon envelop. Porter mentioned a package
wrapped in brown paper that was triangular, about three or four
feet on a side. This sounds just like a folded up rawin
target... which also accounts for the brown paper on Ramey's
floor that is visible in the photographs.

Porter also talked of a couple of wrapped boxes that were very
light weight, which could have contained the balloon envelop.
So, I believe that we have compelling evidence that the balloon
and target were brought from Roswell, we have compelling
evidence to suggest that such material would be available in
Roswell based on their participation in the Pacific atomic
tests,  and, if Ramey ordered the material from Roswell to show
reporters, we have fairly compelling evidence of a coordinated
effort. Any reporter who followed up would have been able to
follow the track and if he had found the balloon explanation
lacking would have to admit that all the pieces fit.

But remember, Colonel Dubose said that the material displayed on
General Ramey's floor was a weather balloon cover story designed
to get the reporters off their backs. And remember that Jesse
Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

So, the balloon and rawin would selected because they could be
found, there was precedent established by the Circleville, Ohio,
case, and it bore, in a gross sense, what had been found in New
Mexico. All this seems to demonstrate a coordinated effort to
get a balloon and rawin into Ramey's office for the reporters
(including J. Bond Johnson) to see.

One last thing based on my experience as an Army Aviator... we
tended to use our aircraft as others used their cars. We thought
nothing of taking a helicopter on a trip that could have been
accomplished by a truck or an automobile. I have no problem with
Ramey using his assets in a similar fashion.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                         Public Memo To James Oberg

From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:02:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:02:17 -0500
Subject: Public Memo To James Oberg



To:   James Oberg
From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
Date: January 16th, 2002


James,

Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

You have had submissions returned to you, un-posted, together
with quotes from the Posting Rules - which you have chosen to
ignore.

UFO UpDates is a free service - I get paid nothing for running
it and all that I ask is that you abide by all the Posting
Rules. You don't.

Therefore, if future messages from you don't conform to the
Posting Rules I've included, and updated to make them even
clearer, below, your submissions, again, will not be passed on.
I simply don't have the time to continually clean up
mis-compiled messages.


Errol Bruce-Knapp,
Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

-=-=-=-=-

UFO UpDates is a manually operated E-mail List.

Each message is highlighted, copied, pasted, re-formatted and
posted to the List by the moderator/operator - functions that are
similar to those of people in print who edit and lay-out 'Letters
To The  Editor'. Creating easy to read 'style', uniform layouts,
catching most of the typos, avoiding most nastiness, off-topic
messages and spam are the objectives.

A subscription does not automatically mean a message you submit
for posting will appear on the List.

UpDates is a free service - you pay nothing. In return, if you
do choose to post to the List, you are asked to abide by the
following:


Posting Rules


  1.    Do _not_ use the 'formatted text' features of your e-mail
program. No colours, no fancy fonts, no italics or bolding, no
fancy quoting designs or html styling. Plain ASCII is what
UpDates uses. Messages that are not plain text will not be
posted.

  2.    Line-length

Please make your lines no more than 65 characters long

--------------------This line is 65 characters-------------------

Longer lines are wrapped by various pieces of software along the Net and leave
awkward
and eye-jarring line lengths.


  3.    Attribution

When responding to a message from the List, _always_ include the
four line 'header' from the body of that message at the start
of _your_ message - eg.:

 >Date: 15 Jan 02 00:00:01 EST
 >From: Subscriber <subscriber@mukluk.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Grays are Grey Area

Again - it's at the beginning of the 'body' of the message you
are responding to and below the UpDates headers.


  4.    Quoting

_Always_ quote from the message to which you are responding.

Quotes should come _before_ you key your response.

Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
first character. It should look like this:

 >Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
 >first character. It should look like this:

No spaces before or after the '>'

Please remove the '>' from blank lines.

Keep quoted material from previous messages to a minimum:  Just
quote enough text to let people know what you are referring to.

Messages that do not conform to the required quoting protocol or
contain excessive quoting will not be posted to UpDates.

Most modern E-Mail software will allow the user to click a
'Reply' button and automatically open a new window, with the
message being responded to inserted with universal quote-mark
(>) at the beginning of each line.

When 'Reply' is clicked, some E-Mail software will insert a line
which reads:

'On 13 Feb 99 at 00:00:01 EST, UFO UpDates [or 'you'] wrote: '

If your program does this, please remove it - UFO UpDates did
not _write_ the message - it merely passed it to the List.


  5.    Don't send 'personal' responses to the list that should
be sent directly to the original author.  Send a message to the
list only if it contains new information that you want
_everyone_ to see.

Messages that contain what the Moderator considers to be
personal attacks or 'flames' will not be posted to the List.


  6.    URLs (Web Site addresses)  _must_ include 'http://' and
be on one line. The Archive software will make the URL a
'click-able' link to that address in your archived message.

  7.    To un-subscribe, send a _new_ message with 'Un-subscribe'
as the 'Subject: '

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












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                          Secrecy News -- 01/15/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 11:56:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:06:23 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/15/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 6
January 15, 2002


**      DO DECLASSIFIED BIOWEAPON DOCUMENTS POSE A THREAT?
**      CONTROLLING BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS RESEARCH
**      RECLASSIFYING DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS


DO DECLASSIFIED BIOWEAPON DOCUMENTS POSE A THREAT?

The New York Times reported on January 13 that the U.S.
government offers for sale hundreds of declassified documents
that amount to "cookbooks" for manufacturing biological weapons,
prompting calls for reclassification of the documents.

But while the sensational storyline of irresponsible government
officials declassifying sensitive secrets and endangering public
safety is irresistible, there are reasons for skepticism and for
opposing a knee-jerk response.

To begin with, the "cookbook" metaphor is misleading.  A regular
cookbook will enable you to bake a cake, more or less well.  But
it is difficult to reduce the manufacture of biological weapons
to a "recipe" since it involves the kind of tacit knowledge that
cannot be readily captured in a technical report.

Moreover, the technologies involved in production of biological
weapons -- from the growth of bacterial cultures to the milling
of desired particle sizes -- overlap to a significant extent
with technologies used in non-weapons research, including
various medical and industrial pursuits.

This means that attempts to classify or reclassify information
about such technologies could be illusory or futile.

"The techniques used for drying and stabilizing bacterial
products are not proscribed or arcane science," said George C.
Smith, a microbiologist who writes The Crypt newsletter on
security policy.  At the same time, he said, "The 'art' of doing
it for specific microorganisms, or very dangerous products of
them, is a complicated matter that cannot easily be completely
defined by a scientific paper."

Smith did not dismiss the possibility that the documents cited
in the New York Times might be truly sensitive, but he cautioned
that no such determination could be made based on the titles of
the documents alone, no matter how inflammatory they might seem.

"The best assessment might be made by people with an exacting
knowledge of the hands-on work," he suggested.  "There is a
misperception, I think, that only people who have worked in
classified programs have this acumen."

Significantly, some of the best informed scientists stopped
short of endorsing calls for blanket reclassification and urged
a more measured response.

"I don't think how-to manuals should be out there," said Ronald
M. Atlas, president-elect of the American Society of
Microbiology.  "But if it's information that has dual purposes
and can protect public health, it should be released," he told
the New York Times.

See "U.S. Selling Papers Showing How to Make Germ Weapons" by
William J. Broad in the January 13 New York Times here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/13/national/13GERM.html

See The Crypt Newsletter homepage here:

http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~crypt/


CONTROLLING BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS RESEARCH

New restrictions on particular historical documents concerning
biological weapons may or may not turn out to be necessary.  But
current and future biological weapons research poses policy
challenges that are far more complex.

"The potentially catastrophic consequences of a biological
attack call not only for improved preparedness to mitigate the
effects of such weapons, but also for robust measures to impede
their development, acquisition, and use," writes Gerald L.
Epstein, now of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

"Our ability to deny access to these weapons, however, is
fundamentally limited," Epstein says in a newly published
analysis.

"Much of the relevant equipment is in widespread commercial use
and internationally available; the pathogens involved can
typically be found in the environment; and the underlying
research and technology base is available to a rapidly growing
and thoroughly international technical community."

"This means not only that a sophisticated adversary willing to
devote sufficient time and resources to developing biological
weapons is likely to succeed, but that policy measures to
frustrate such developments are likely to affect many legitimate
activities outside of the ones they are intended to address."

"At the same time, however, not all those who contemplate
developing biological weapons will be sophisticated, patient, or
rich.  Increasing the difficulty and the visibility of any
attempt to acquire such weapons -- particularly by a less
capable or less committed actor -- is potentially valuable."

Epstein carefully examines the competing interests affecting
proposed restrictions on access to pathogens.  And he explores
the need for, and feasibility of, controls on what he terms
"contentious research," referring to biological or biomedical
research that could have immediate weapons implications.

"Controlling Biological Warfare Threats: Resolving Potential
Tensions Among the Research Community, Industry, and the
National Security Community" was just published in Critical
Reviews in Microbiology, vol. 27, no. 4 (2001).  It is not
currently available online.


RECLASSIFYING DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS

The question of whether documents, once declassified, can be or
should be reclassified has been asked on a number of occasions
over the years, and then answered in different ways.

Nuclear weapons information, once declassified, cannot be
reclassified, according to the Department of Energy's
interpretation of Section 142 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2162).  (DOE officials sometimes finagle this
restriction by withholding the declassified information as
Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information.)

Under President Reagan, officials were permitted to reclassify
declassified information and documents under certain conditions.
This authority was exercised on numerous occasions, but these do
not seem to have been publicly reported.  See Section 1.6(c) and
(d) of President Reagan's Executive Order 12356:

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12356.htm#reclass

President Clinton permitted reclassification of declassified
information only if it had not been officially released to the
public. Once it was officially released it could not then be
reclassified.  See Section 1.8(c) and (d) of President Clinton's
Executive Order 12958, which remains in effect today:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html#reclass

A review of this executive order is now underway by the Bush
Administration and may include consideration of expanded
authority to reclassify declassified information.

FAS has urged that any such reclassification authority be
narrowly circumscribed and that agency proposals for
reclassification actions be subject to independent approval or
rejection by the Interagency Security Classification Appeals
Panel.


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message: subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 17:16:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:09:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:36:40 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >For about the hundredth time, Dennis, I think the stuff on the
 >floor is an aluminum foil and balsa wood radar kite with a
 >weather balloon. I'm not with RPIT and their goofy stuff about
 >this being real saucer debris -- got it?


David,

Got it! Glad to see we're on the same side of at least one issue
here.

 >I can't tell you where Ramey got this stuff from (not even
 >Dubose knew that when asked). However, I can give you some good
 >arguments that this probably wasn't from Mogul.

 >Mogul #4 (supposedly the crash object according to debunkers)
 >consisted of about 2 dozen neoprene balloons, 3 radar targets
 >(though there is zero evidence that it actually had any radar
 >targets), and assorted payload and altitude control equipment.

 >1. Instruments: There are no instruments of any kind pictured in
 >the photos. Marcel and Cavitt report recovering no instruments
 >(except for a little black box Marcel said Cavitt found). In
 >1947, Ramey went on the radio and stated that there were no
 >instruments recovered. With no instruments, what exactly links
 >the Rawin and balloon to Mogul? The debris is indistinguishable
 >from an ordinary Rawin weather balloon.

 >2. Quantity of debris: Again despite assertions to the contrary,
 >there is insufficient debris to make up even one radar target
 >(e.g., the stick lengths computed by some photoanalyst for the
 >AF came up with less than half the sticks required to make up
 >one complete Rawin). Ramey or his people also repeatedly
 >referred to the debris as a singular balloon and target. A quote
 >of Ramey's from United Press in an evening edition of a west
 >coast newspaper on July 8 (which went to press before Irving
 >Newton ever came in) has Ramey stating that it appeared to be
 >the "remnants of a weather balloon and radar reflector." UP also
 >quoted Ramey that night as saying that a _part_ of a balloon was
 >found nearby.

Has anyone ever suggested that what was displayed in Ramey's
office was supposed to be everything recovered outside Roswell?
Weren't these samples simply to be displayed at a press
conference? In other words, what's quantity got to do with it?

 >Irving Newton in 1947 also referred to the debris as coming from
 >a singular balloon/reflector (as did the FBI telegram). When I
 >asked Newton in the present day whether there was more than one
 >balloon or radar target, he told me definitely not. He thought
 >the debris came from a regular Rawin weather balloon.

 >So where is the multi-balloon, multi-radar target Mogul? Again,
 >there is nothing here to clearly link the debris to Mogul in any
 >way.

See above. What does the _quantity_ of debris in Ramey's office
have to do with the quantity of debris at the original crash
site?

Moreover, why did Ramey order up a weather balloon and rawin
radar reflector as his preferred cover-up material -- when he
could have used virtually anything?

The original press release referred to a relatively intact disc
stored in a rancher's shed. Marcel wasn't going to be able to
testify otherwise, so who would have had the slightest inkling
that what was shown on Ramey's office floor would bear at least
some passing resemblance to what some witnesses later testified
was found on the Foster ranch?

Did Ramey just 'luck out' by ordering up a weather balloon and
radar reflector for display? Did he start out with a weather
balloon, and say to himself, "No, that's not good enough, better
throw in a wrecked rawin reflector, too. You know how the press
are these days."

Fact is the press were in his side pocket in those days and he
could have shown them _anything_. No particular (let alone
urgent) need to fly in a balloon and rawin reflector from
somewhere else, at least that I can think of. Especially since
none of what he offered up as Roswell wreckage in any way
resembled what was mentioned in the original press release.
Regrettably, it's too bad that the press didn't ask better
questions at the time, or we might know more than we do today.

<snip>

 >There is nothing here at all to link this singular balloon and
 >singular Rawin to Mogul. It is instead a standard singular
 >balloon/radar target combination.

How many balloons and rawins should he have displayed in his
office? He was showing samples of what was recovered. Has anyone
ever suggested that _everything_ recovered outside Roswell was
on display in Ramey's office that day? If so, it's news to me,
though welcome if substantiated.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                      Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 00:25:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:12:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Deschamps


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:54:20 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000

<snip>

 >>Another case of re-hashing... and re-appointing an alternative
 >>explanation to a classic UFO incident.

 >Yeah, what's your point Michel? If you've got more than the
 >sketchy info I have, then dish it up. I have my own reasons for
 >eliminating other possibilities. Besides I haven't had a nice
 >nibble on my ass for some time now. I take what I can get.


Don,

I was targeting Robert Boreham who initiated the theory that
Methane gas bubbles/cloud would be responsible for the radar
return....the UFO which merged with the fighter plane back in
1953.

Methane bubbles are a bust!

Who are these people who are repeatedly re-hashing classic UFO
cases and labelling them with alternative explanations?

What's next? Bring back the false notion that the CFS
Falconbridge incident was nothing more than ice crystals in the
clouds reflecting sunlight?

Robert Boreham doesn't know what he is talking about!

Sorry if my statement got mis-directed... somehow.....


Only my opinion,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                       Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:16:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:55:28 -0800

 >>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000
<snip>

 >Well, Michel this is an incident that could be explained by some
 >rather prosaic means, if you call a large methane bubble
 >prosaic.


Hi GT,

It was my question to begin with - re. Methane bubble for which
I still haven't received an answer. Noted Filer's File had
mentioned an aircraft missing over Lake Michigan recently. No
debris. Same thing with the F-89C and a couple of light aircraft
- a piper Commanche if memeory serves out of Toronto enroute to
Chicago, for one. If the hydrate theory works in the tongue of
the ocean why not the possibility in the Great Lakes area?

Anyway, some of the folks have been coming up with some
possibilities and Michel thinks I'm a debunker - where the heck
that came from I don't know - and I still don't have an answer.

The F-89C suffered from the T-tail syndrome - wings blanking the
tail surface in high angles of attack, if I remember correctly -
as well as poor tail design.

I'm not likely to get an answer on this because there aren't too
many bubbles of methane around to bounce radar off of.

The only report I have around the Kinross incident is the USAF's
own reporting the facts as they stood then and the fact that the
pilot and navigator were presummed dead.

Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exsist for that time
period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in? I haven't
been able to find anything for that day or the few days before
or after. Larry hatch might have something in his *U*base.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                        Italian UFO Newsflash No. 340

From: Edoardo Russo <e.russo@cisu.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:55:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:22:38 -0500
Subject: Italian UFO Newsflash No. 340


ITALIAN UFO NEWSFLASH

ISSUE NO. 340 -  10 JANUARY 2002

by the Italian Center for UFO Studies
(Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici, CISU)

Contents:

- 630 Italian Sightings During 2001
- ISSN Assigned To Journal Of The C.I.S.U.

        630 Italian Sightings During 2001

The complete number of reported sightings of presumed UFO
phenomena in Italy during the course of the Year 2001 is
slightly higher than the total that we had estimated some weeks
back.

In fact, 630 is the number of cases gathered and recorded by
CISU "Italian sightings working group", which has issued a press
release of the data relative to the recently ended twelve-month
period.

As already and duly evidenced, 2001 saw a veritable wave of UFO
sightings in our country, with a doubling in the number of
reports with respect to the media over previous years. The wave
was centered around the summer months (more than two-thirds of
the cases) and particularly in August, having had an abnormal
course in comparison with other Italian waves, which tend to
occur during the autumn.

The monthly lists of cases have already been accessible for some
time on the Internet Website of the C.I.S.U. at:

http://www.arpnet.it/ufo/casi0101.htm

as well as a monthly distribution at:

http://www.arpnet.it/ufo/mesi2001.htm

They will be updated during the next few days with data from
December and with the new cases of the preceding months,
received during recent weeks.

[Communication by Giorgio Abraini.]


ISSN Assigned To CISU Journal

In light of its new quarterly frequency, the official journal of
the C.I.S.U, 'UFO  - Rivista di informazione ufologica' has
obtained the assignment of an ISSN (International Standard
Serial Number) code.

The code has been assigned to our journal by the
"Istituto di studi sulla ricerca e documentazione scientifica
del Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche (The National Research Council
Institute of Studies on Research and Scientific Documentation),
which principally conducts research work on the politics of research
and of scientific-technical information  and is the office charged for
the ISSN in Italy.

The Italian Center for Ufological Studies is the first Italian
UFO association to have obtained the ISSN code for its own
journal.

[Collaboration by Gian Paolo Grassino.]


Collaborators on this edition were:
Giorgio Abraini and Gian Paolo Grassino.

- - -

This is the English translation of UFOTEL, a free phone/Internet
information service on UFOs edited weekly by Edoardo Russo for
the Italian Center for UFO Studies (Centro Italiano Studi
Ufologici), available in Italian by calling +39-011-545294, or
by e-mail subscription, or on CISU website at:

http://www.arpnet.it/ufo/ultime.htm

UFOTEL is a supplement to 'UFO - Rivista di informazione
ufologica', published by the Italian Center for UFO Studies,
registered at Tribunale di Torino,  No. 3670, on 19 June 1986.
Director: Giovanni Settimo. Publisher: Cooperativa UPIAR, Corso
Vittorio Emanuele 108, 10121 Turin, Italy

Translated from Italian to English by:
Gary J. Presto, Freelance IT-EN Translator/Proofreader
1123 Revere Beach Pky., # 12
Revere, MA 02151 USA
Tel.: ++ 1.781.485.1683, Fax: ++ 1.781.485.1684
ICQ: 110502923, E-mail: gjpresto@mediaone.net
Webpage: http://profiles.yahoo.com/italoman9

- - -

(c) 2002  by: CISU,
Corso Vittorio Emanuele 108,  10121 Torino, Italia

This newsletter (as a whole or in part) may be freely copied,
photocopied, reproduced, stored, distributed and retrieved, at
the only condition that Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici is
reported as the source.

You may get it directly via e-mail by subscribing (just send a
blank message to: cisuflash-subscribe@yahoogroups.com)

The CISU is a no-profit association whose aims are:

- to promote the scientific study of UFO phenomena in Italy;
- to help circulate information about UFO phenomena and studies;
- to coordinate national activities of data collecting and studying.

You may reach Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici:

- by mail: CISU, Corso Vittorio Emanuele 108, 10121 Torino, Italia
- by phone: +39 (011) 329.02.79 (24 hours UFO Hotline)
- by fax: +39 (011) 54.50.33
- by Internet e-mail: cisu@ufo.it
- at the World Wide Web URL: http://www.cisu.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                  Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:32:14 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 12:27:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg


 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >To:  James Oberg
 >From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >Date: January 16th, 2002

 >James,

 >Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

OK - this time you go too far! This is Oberg bashing, pure and
simple! Moreover, I'll bet this is a selective application of
your authoritarian so-called rules, and that you'd let that
coffee-bush-banging Juan Valdez prance around in UpDates with
line lengths reminiscent of the epics of Homer! Shame!

 >You have had submissions returned to you, un-posted, together
 >with quotes from the Posting Rules - which you have chosen to
 >ignore.

Ha! Your rules are for the unwashed and the unlearned, and not
for those of Mr. Obergs mighty 22 (long rifle!) rim-fire
caliber! You should count yourself among the blessed that he
posts here at all! Moreover, you should send the edits that you
gladly perform back to him for final approval a second, or even
third, time!

 >UFO UpDates is a free service - I get paid nothing for running
 >it and all that I ask is that you abide by all the Posting
 >Rules. You don't.

Whiner! Dial 1-800-WAA-AAAA!

 >Therefore, if future messages from you don't conform to the
 >Posting Rules I've included, and updated to make them even
 >clearer, below, your submissions, again, will not be passed on.
 >I simply don't have the time to continually clean up
 >mis-compiled messages.

Officious Scoundrel!

Your thin threat is seen for what it is, Mr. E-B-K (if that is
your real name!)! Needless criticism of your ufological bet'ters
intellectu'al! Ha!


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
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.

-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:46:11 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 12:30:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:43:14 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
 >>some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
 >>that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

 >I do not speak alone when I say that you guys are completely out
 >to lunch on this, particularly your statement that _none_ of the
 >debris is from a RAWIN radar target.

 >Do any of you guys even know how the things were constructed or
 >what they looked like?

 >I can show you photos of the Rawins from that time period with
 >the identical white paper backing to the aluminum foil wrapped
 >around the sticks forming a straight white seam, just as you see
 >in these photos. The sheets of foil paper made up triangles 2' x
 >2' x 2.8', again evidenced in the photos. The stick lengths and
 >dimensions are certainly consistent with those used to make the
 >targets.


David,

As one of those "out to lunch" who _did_ come out with the
statement that _none_ of the debris was that of an ML307 can I
here publicly say I could be wrong.

Over the last many weeks one of the RPIT members Andrew Lavoie a
Canadian Engineering technologist has been using some 3D
modelling software at his disposal to model the scene in
currently one, of the Fort Worth photographs. With the aid of
the software he is now getting size measurements of articles
within the image with aprox 2% error. He has a set of material
sizes given to him by Prof Charles Moore and taken directly from
the intact ML307 he still has.

Here's the interesting bit, _some_ of the measurements clustered
on _some_ of the debris _do_ fit within a few percent, but it
seems many more _do_not_  and this includes many of the struts,
some are out by 125% and more, also much of the edge tape seen
in the pictures does not meet the size specs Prof Moore
supplied.

So can I now downgrade my statement to " only some of the debris
_may_ be from an ML307".

I still believe a significant portion of the debris remains
unexplained, none of the debris that exhibits anomalies has
provided measurements so far that match those of ML307 material.

 >>>>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>>>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >>>This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >>>photographs were shot and nothing more.

 >>Maybe and maybe not. Careful inventory and description of all
 >>material in all photos would settle this question.

 >I agree with Kevin Randle. The Newton photo uses a camera angle
 >pointed to the left, showing the leftmost side of the brown
 >paper with debris on top and misses a little bit of the debris
 >to the right and out of the frame.  It also does not show most
 >of the debris below the paper and closest to the camera. The
 >Ramey/Dubose photos has the camera further back, pointed more
 >centrally, showing the complete collection of debris left and
 >right plus pieces "below" the paper and closest to the camera.
 >It's just a matter of camera angle.

 >The larger triangular piece with the stick attached being held
 >by Col. Dubose while seated in the central chair is now more to
 >the left and being held in Newton's left hand.  Marcel also has
 >hold of this larger piece with an attached stick. Newton has
 >grabbed one of the smaller pieces from the left side and is
 >holding it in his right hand.

 >Material has been moved around a little bit, but it's just looks
 >like ordinary posing for pictures.

 >I agree that a careful inventory would be very useful (in fact,
 >I am working on this now). So why the wild rhetoric from your
 >side of the aisle that the debris has been removed in the Newton
 >photo and thus "sanitized"? I see zero evidence of this. It just
 >more nonsense about how this obvious radar reflector debris
 >represents real saucer material.

An example of "sanitization", in both Marcel images there is a
piece of twisted material seen at Marcel's feet, this is best
seen in MarceRight, where it can be spotted starting halfway
across the bottom edge of the picture and running up diagonally
about 30 degree to the left.  The debris on show in both Marcel
images approximates to roughly the bottom right quadrant of
debris seen in the Newton image. Most of the debris seen around
the twisted piece can be spotted in roughly the same position in
this part of the Newton image, _but_ not the twisted piece. That
piece of debris has a number of anomalies  that single it out as
none ML307 debris,  it's thickness is far greater than any foil
used in a radar target so much so that it shows clearly on one
end a very neat right angled folded lip, it also has clearly
defined raised /stamped markings.

This none target piece of debris is nowhere to be seen in the
Newton shot even though it's associates in the Marcel shot are
still evident.

 >>If the material on Ramey's carpet is not the material from
 >>Roswell, then what is it? It's not a RAWIN.

 >Yes, it definitely _is_ the remains of a RAWIN target! Everybody
 >but RPIT people clearly see that. It's aluminum foil with white
 >paper backing part of the balsa stick framework

 >>If it's not a RAWIN, what is it?

 >No need to speculate here, since it is a RAWIN.

David, the above piece of debris is clearly seen in the Marcel
images without any digital enhancement, what part of a ML307
target was this?.

Also in the Marcel images cables can be seen to the rear of a
beam section attached to a foil sheet, what part of a ML307
target was this?.

I too have images of ML307's from 1947/48 and also images of the
ML307C Charles Moore still has, and the Army Signal Corp ML307
drawings. I _cannot_ resolve these items. I therefore have to
conclude these items of debris, along with others I cannot
resolve do not belong to an ML307 as the AF concluded. If you
too cannot identify just these two items of anomalous debris
then I cannot see logically how you can continue in your stance
that _all_ the debris in the pictures is a radar reflector,
because these two items and few others plainly say it's not.

The twisted piece of material with the fold I mention is aprox
1mm thick and as _both_ sides can be seen to be shiny and
metallic in nature, due to the twist, there is no backing paper
involved here to beef up the thickness.

<snip>

 >However, I have looked over some very high resolution images and
 >have yet to see anything out of the ordinary here. I had hoped
 >maybe some "real" debris might have inadvertantly been left, but
 >I have never seen anything like that. It's just torn-up
 >foil/paper and some stick framework of a Rawin target.

Isn't 1mm thick foil sheet with right angle folds out of the
ordinary enough? On an ML307??

I'm not making this stuff up, go look and see for yourself in
the Marcel Right image... it also has the cable loom that an
ML307 didn't have.


Neil










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                                PsyOps Again

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 12:43:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 12:43:53 -0500
Subject: PsyOps Again




Source: New York Magazine

http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5615

gotham

Psychic Ops

"Remote viewers" say the Feds have sought their help since 9/11.
Might this explain all those "credible, nonspecific threats"?

By Geoff Gray

Earlier this month, Prudence Calabrese, a West Coast psychic,
flew into New York on business. She had two meetings: One was a
catered sushi lunch at an uptown hedge fund that had hired her,
for about $20,000, to predict this year's profit outlook.
("Their investors will be very happy.") The second, she says,
was with agents from the FBI.

During the Cold War, the Pentagon spent millions training
"remote viewers" to spy on Russian military targets. (The
Soviets, of course, had their own psychics.) The program, called
Stargate, was very controversial, very X-Files, and until
funding was cut in 1995, completely classified.

Now some of the psychics connected to that program and others,
like Calabrese, say that federal officials are calling upon them
again. Lyn Buchanan, a former CIA remote-viewing trainer, says
that since September 11 he has received requests for
intelligence from three separate federal agencies. And Las
Vegas-based psychic Angela Thompson Smith says she has been
asked by the Feds (she won't reveal which ones) to help identify
perpetrators of the World Trade Center attacks and the anthrax
letters, and to pinpoint future terrorist targets.

What do remote viewers see, and how do they see it? Calabrese,
36, mentally visualizes her subject and blindly jots down
"doodles" or "squiggles." Then she lists ten words that come to
mind. Afterward, she sketches a more complete drawing -- "the
big picture." She repeats this process three times, then
compares notes with the other fourteen viewers in her firm.
"It's about 75 percent accurate.", she says. "The data is always
correct -- it's the interpretation that's off sometimes."

Before her meeting with the FBI, over coffee at the Algonquin,
Calabrese shares some of her report. "It's not very pleasant,"
she says. "We see more attacks." As for the location -- no big
surprises there. "We are all seeing the subway," she says,
pulling out three sketches, said to be from three separate
viewers, featuring giant wormlike objects snaking beneath
crowded streets. The worms are circled: "That's the target." The
cryptic diagrams include words like SNOW BANK. "That could
suggest a season.", she explains helpfully.

A spokesmen from the FBI's New York Bureau won't confirm or deny
Calabrese's alleged meetings. "We have 1,100 investigators
here," says Joe Valiquette. "She could have met with anyone." In
Washington, however, her name was more familiar. A former
Justice Department lawyer said Calabrese's psychic findings,
along with those of other remote viewers, have been looked at in
the past, and in some cases, the information was "elevated up
the channels".

The FBI does not use psychics as official sources, the lawyer
says; it happens "under the table." After September 11, "the
attorney general told us to think outside the box," says this
person, who still works closely with federal law-enforcement
officials. "This is definitely thinking outside the box."
(Perhaps that explains why Calabrese's premonitions sound ever
so slightly like Ashcroft's "credible but nonspecific threats".)

But critics wonder if Calabrese's marketing instincts have
gotten the better of her. "I doubt she's making it up," says
Paul H. Smith, a former military viewer, and now president of
Remote Viewing Instructional Services. "But she's also, well, a
little out there."

Indeed. On her Website:

http://www.LargerUniverse.com/

Calabrese claims to have had a vision of the World Trade Center
attacks way back in 1997, with help from a source she refers to
as "the Grey Dude", a three-foot-six-inch extraterrestrial who
appears in her bathroom at night. So where's Osama bin Laden? It
seems that the Grey Dude's guess is as good as anyone's.


 From the January 21, 2002 issue of New York Magazine.

[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                 Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:35:20 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 15:07:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro


 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>



 >To:  James Oberg >From: Errol Bruce-Knapp >Date: January 16th,
2002


 >James,

 >Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

 >You have had submissions returned to you, un-posted, together
 >with quotes from the Posting Rules - which you have chosen to
 >ignore.

 >UFO UpDates is a free service - I get paid nothing for running
 >it and all that I ask is that you abide by all the Posting
 >Rules. You don't.

 >Therefore, if future messages from you don't conform to the
 >Posting Rules I've included, and updated to make them even
 >clearer, below, your submissions, again, will not be passed on.
 >I simply don't have the time to continually clean up
 >mis-compiled messages.


 >Errol Bruce-Knapp, >Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto

Yeah - right! Here we go again. I've been there before myself
Bubba, on another venue. How dare you, you inebriant of Gripple!
You of all people should know that Jacques Oldbarge is not among
those of us who must floow the rules. Haven't you noticed that
by now?

Since his very first post toastie, I recognized that Jimmy
Newburgh is one in a million, a man of means by no means. A mean
man of means no less. And you, with your high fallootin
attitood, bash this truthful, honest, forthright, self
respecting, straight dealing, well intentioned, by the book
(his) little man to a degree never in the his story of UpDates,
have we seen before. (I think I runned on)

You, Mister Errol Bruce-Knapp, have sown your strips, shown your
stripes... sorry. And they now show. Tiger, man eater, bleeder
of NASA godfellows, goodfellows (hic)! Such disrespect. Such...
such... such .... wait a minute.... I am so sorry! It was
momentary Gripple insanity. I just got my brains back from the
cleaner.

OK, OK, I said my piece, now I shall say my peace.

_Good show, EBK!_ And forgive my momentary inebriatory
confabulation of your intoberative insegrediousness, your Errol
Bruce-Knapp shipness. And another thing... you owe me
thirty-sven bucks! With interest, it's now up a $37,209.42. Pay
up. We know how much money you make doing that radio show and
doing this venue. And it a lot more than I gonna get for the
sale of my book. So there!

I forgot the name of the voice in my head, so I'll just sign me,


Charley









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:15:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 15:11:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - McCoy


 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:55:28 -0800

 >>>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:52:28 -0500

 >>>>From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:25:42 +0000
 ><snip>

Hi all, Don.

 >>Well, Michel this is an incident that could be explained by some
 >>rather prosaic means, if you call a large methane bubble
 >>prosaic.

I know that methane does exsist in the warm waters of the Gulf
of Mexico, and there is some concern that large methane bubbles
could erupt in the Altantic off the coast of the southern US.
The Great Lakes are a Glacial era "artifact" (for lack of a
better word) The bottoms of the lakes are the result of the
scouring process of Glacial movement. They also are pretty cold,
this could contribute to methane preservation or even formation,
who knows?

 >It was my question to begin with - re. Methane bubble for which
 >I still haven't received an answer. Noted Filer's File had
 >mentioned an aircraft missing over Lake Michigan recently. No
 >debris. Same thing with the F-89C and a couple of light aircraft
 >- a piper Commanche if memeory serves out of Toronto enroute to
 >Chicago, for one. If the hydrate theory works in the tongue of
 >the ocean why not the possibility in the Great Lakes area?

I seem to remember the 'Swamp Gas' theory - wasn't that to
counter the Michigan sightings of the 60's by none other than
Dr, Hynek? Swamp Gas is Methane. Judging from the Peat Bogs and
Marshes, (even from decaying biological matter under the water)
in the north country, Its entrieley possible that a Methane
Bubble could have formed and caused the demise of the F-89C.
I'd like to see and article or abstract about the possiblity
myself. But The Hydrate Theory would have placed a large amount
to methane in the lakebed.

<snip>

 >The F-89C suffered from the T-tail syndrome - wings blanking the
 >tail surface in high angles of attack, if I remember correctly -
 >as well as poor tail design.

 >I'm not likely to get an answer on this because there aren't too
 >many bubbles of methane around to bounce radar off of.

Yeah, I hear you, if we did - with what passes for Global Warming
now would pale in comparason.

 >The only report I have around the Kinross incident is the USAF's
 >own reporting the facts as they stood then and the fact that the
 >pilot and navigator were presummed dead.

And the cold water not condusive to letting the bodies float,
either. fresh water is several degrees less buoyant that salt
water. Also, if they hit the water hard, there might not be any
big pieces to see. and those that survived, probably went
straight to the bottom.

 >Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exsist for that time
 >period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in? I haven't
 >been able to find anything for that day or the few days before
 >or after. Larry hatch might have something in his *U*base.

I was thinking the same week-before and after the incedent.
Larry may well have something.

But, having been in and around machines that fly, I know _any_
thing can happen- the real Murphy of "Murphys Law" was an
aeronautical engineer.


Regards,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 16

                   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:06:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 15:44:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:32:14 -0600

 >>From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>To:  James Oberg
 >>From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >>Date: January 16th, 2002

 >>James,

 >>Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >>UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >>the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

Hello Alfred,

 >OK - this time you go too far! This is Oberg bashing, pure and
 >simple! Moreover, I'll bet this is a selective application of
 >your authoritarian so-called rules, and that you'd let that
 >coffee-bush-banging Juan Valdez prance around in UpDates with
 >line lengths reminiscent of the epics of Homer! Shame!

See, you go and make fun of my grammatical handicap (in public)
and you smother it in a cheesy racial slur, but if I say
anything about the pink, lacy Victoria's Secret underwear all
you poets are expected wear by the writers guild, then suddenly
_I'm_ the bad guy!

 >>UFO UpDates is a free service - I get paid nothing for running
 >>it and all that I ask is that you abide by all the Posting
 >>Rules. You don't.

Hey man, you told me that _everybody_ has to sleep with you in
order to pay for being on the UpDates List! You lied to me. I
will no longer 'love you long time' as I have been humiliatingly
forced to do in the past. Do you have any idea how much conflict
has been caused in my marriage by all those unexplained week-end
'sleep-over' trips to Toronto?

As for the diamond studded, (with the ornate UFO graphic) knee
pads that you sent me for Xmas Errol...  I won't be needing
them any more - thank you very much!

Feeling insulted, dirty, and used,


John Velez  ;)










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                           Filer's Files - 03-2002

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:19:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:00:58 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files - 03-2002


FILER'S FILES #03-2002 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
January 16, 2002, Majorstar@AOL.COM.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,

UFOs were observed over New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Michigan, Louisiana, Texas, Canada, Puerto Rico, Brazil,
England, Scotland, and Spain. Sightings have picked up strongly
since New Year's Eve.

SCIENTIST INVESTIGATES NORTHEAST SIGHTING REPORT

Dick Lions reports, "I have spoken at length with a scientist
at the labs who believes we may be able to test whether my
hypothesis of ionizing radiations being present in Charlene's
sighting is possible. The irregular red glowing stove shaped
object appeared about 20 feet in front of her car. The
headlights of the car began to flicker, the radio she was
listening to crackled then died. The engine stopped and she saw
a red glowing almost translucent like a red glowing stove
element, somewhat irregular shaped object that hovered ten feet
off the ground. The object was irregular in shape, roundish but
the edges were not well-defined and seemed to wobble or change
almost like a cartoon animation. The object also seemed to be
giving off sparks or something and maintained its position for
five minutes, when it morphed into a pillar like shape, and
shot straight up into the sky at incredible speed. (See Filer's
Files #50)

First let me describe two possible methods of investigation to
consider. The first has to do with the failed clock and CD
player. If, as my theory would contend, their failure was due
to penetrating radiations, then those radiations would likely
have caused electric charges to become entrapped inside some of
the semiconductor chips. The trapped charges disrupt normal
transistor functions, and the chip then doesn't work. However,
by heating the chip to just the right temperature, those
trapped charges can then be "annealed out". If an inoperative
chip in one of your devices could be made to function again by
annealing it, that would be substantial proof that it had been
exposed to ionizing radiation. Perhaps it's appropriate to ask
here whether those devices are still inoperative, or whether
they began working again? If either one is still inoperative
they can be tested. The other line of investigation would be to
test some exposed material for radioactive transmutati! ons. The
fact that things inside the car were strongly affected implies
the radiations were very penetrating. If those radiations were,
for example, protons, then they would likely have caused
transmutations of trace amounts of materials, particularly
metals. Most of the transmuted material would be radioactive,
and the presence of that radioactivity would be a positive
indication of exposure. Unfortunately, though, most of the
radioactivity dies away within a few days or weeks, and can
then no longer be detected. However, if we're lucky, there may
be some unusual material in something that results in
radioisotopes with longer lifetimes, and there might still be
enough of those left to detect. Electronic devices often
contain lots of different metals (iron, aluminum, nickel,
chromium, tin, lead, gold, etc.), so would be worth testing in
this manner. I should point out that the amount of
radioactivity produced by the exposure would have been
minuscule, so there would b! e no hazard in handling exposed
materials. It takes an extremely sensitive laboratory setup to
have any chance of detecting such small amounts of
radioactivity.

If you sent us an inoperative clock or CD player, we could use
it for both tests. First we would put it in a "counting
chamber" for radioactivity analysis. That would take about a
week. Then we would try to find an inoperative chip and do the
annealing trick. Both of these are "long shots" insofar as
finding something definitive is concerned. On the other hand,
this is a rare opportunity to test a possible explanation, and
a "hit" on either test would have great scientific weight in
arguing the case. Do you think it might be possible to make one
of those devices (or perhaps something else) available to us
for such testing? A possible "something else," for example,
might be the batteries in a flashlight or cellular phone (if
you had one in the car at the time). Even though the phone may
not have been affected, the materials in the battery may have
undergone trace amounts of transmutation. If you did have a
flashlight in the car and it was a metal one, we'd probably a!
sk for it. If it were plastic, only the batteries would be
useful. If you can think of anything else along that line that
may have been present in the car, I'd like to hear about it.
Thanks to Dick Lions.

Editor's Note: Many well-known scientists with credentials and
awards read these files. Most choose to remain anonymous. Many
complain their supervisors are not open minded. I have noticed
an awakening-taking place concerning the possibility that the
UFO phenomenon is real or at least worth investigating.
Although, Earth Lights are a real phenomenon many reports of
fiery plasmas appear to be part of the UFO cloaking or
propulsion system.

NEW YORK OVAL LIGHT OVER LONG ISLAND ON NEW year's DAY.

NEW HYDE PARK -- The witness reports coming home sober at 5:00
AM on January 1, 2002, from a New Year's Eve party and saw a
strange light in the sky. It was strange only because it was
ascending in the sky next to another aircraft, which was
obviously an airplane. The strange gliding light was ascending
higher and was brighter then the airplane. In addition, this
object appeared to be made of light and did not blink. When it
stopped ascending, it changed its color from a white light to a
brighter yellow light. It was in the western sky, which could
mean it was flying right over NYC no more then 25 miles away.
It flew at the same altitude for a few minutes, then did a
small, barely noticeable zigzag movement, and then changed back
to a white light color. A minute later it disappeared in the
very clear night sky.

LONG ISLAND CITY -- On December 30, 2001, about midnight eight
friends left a restaurant and stopped to look at the moon and
stars. One witness reports, "What we were looking at started to
dart and shoot all over the sky. There were so many! Some lined
up in order and then just went off in their own direction; just
to zip back and forth. Others looked like they were playing a
game of cat and mouse. They were darting all over the sky for
the longest time. They ran back into the restaurant and called
the people to go out to see it. We were all in shock! Thanks to
Peter Davenport Director NUFORC, www.ufocenter.com

NEW JERSEY FIERY RED LIGHT

VERNON -- A witness phoned to report seeing a huge fiery red
light just above the trees over a field on January 16, 2002.
She was driving south of Route 94 at 6:40 AM about five miles
from the New York border when she saw the brilliant red light.
It dimmed then moved to another spot in the sky where it became
quite large again. She was very frightened and drove twenty
miles over the speed limit to get away from the light. This
area is part of the Appalachian Mountains and Earth Lights
could be the cause of the fiery red light. The Vernon Police
were notified and they mentioned they had received numerous
reports of a light near the top of a mountain and both the
police and Park Rangers were investigating." The witness was
very upset by the incident.

NORTH NEW JERSEY -- Another report stated, "My neighbor
recently caught some video this week on two different nights.
Although this may not be a UFO, it is very curious. The light
is off in the distance, and seems to hover, when paused it has
various colors and shapes. Thanks to Brian Vike Independent UFO
Field Investigator/Researcher  HBCC UFO Research
yogibear@bulkley.net http://www.geocities.com/hbccufo/home.html

PENNSYLVANIA DARK SPIDER-SHAPED OBJECTS

WHITEHALL -- The witness and his mother saw two objects flying
above Circuit City on January 2, 2002. The sun had just set at
5:00 PM when the witness's mother asked, "What are those? At
first they looked like dark planes flying parallel to each
other with no lights. The witness says, "I noticed the odd
shape of the crafts. They were shaped like spiders, with a
solid body in the middle and extensions from that in all
directions. There were 4 or 5 extensions and no sound was
heard, and there were no lights on the crafts and they were
very dark in color. The unusual shape scared us both and I
became fearful of terrorism by another country, and my mother
ran into the store to get my dad. By the time they came out it
was too far away to see. Thanks to NUFORC www.ufocenter.com.

OHIO TRIANGLE HOVERING NEAR FREEWAY CHRISTMAS EVE.

COLUMBUS -- The witness was driving east on I-70 late on
December 24, 2001, when he saw a bright light hovering over the
highway at 11:00 PM. As he drove closer, there were two lights
1500 to 2000 feet up and just sitting still. The witness
states, "While going past it, I lowered my window and heard no
sound but I could barely see the shape of a triangle." In the
front, two lights were noticeable, one at one corner, and one
at another. A third light was observed at the back (apex) that
was much dimmer. It was not a helicopter, as I am an EMT. I had
my CB radio on and didn't hear anyone else saying they saw it.
Visibility was good and sky clear. It was about the size of my
thumbnail

SALEM -- My sister was taking photos of a new pond that was
constructed on my brother's property on December 28, 2001,
located 1.5 miles out of the Salem city limits. She didn't see
anything at the time, but when she got the pictures back from
being developed, a saucer shaped object could be seen in one of
the photos. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC

MICHIGAN FLYING TRIANGLE

WILLIAMSBURG -- On December 27, 2001, at 10:40 PM, the witness
had been snow plowing and I noticed an object in the sky with
bright white lights and maybe 1 or 2 small red ones. When the
witness got a 100 yards out, he stopped his vehicle to get a
better look. The object was hovering and probably the size of a
basketball court. The witness says, " In no more than 5 seconds
it went from a dead stand still to an abrupt fast sprint
forward and after a few seconds began to slow. I threw my truck
in reverse and drove backwards somewhat parallel to the object,
the horizon grew higher with trees, and I eventually lost it."
He drove out to the main road, to a higher in elevation in only
20 seconds but it had departed. "The way the thing moved and
looked, was nothing similar to any aircraft I have ever seen,"
he said. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC

WISCONSIN LIGHTS

MARSHFIELD/PITTSVILLE -- UFOWisconsin witness reports, "My
friend and his son were coming home from Marshfield on January
9, 2002, and when they arrived they had told me that they had
seen a lot of unidentifiable flashing lights in the sky and to
go out on the roof and look. Two adults and two teenagers
witnessed these lights from 7 to 7:45 PM. There were many small
lights in the sky, each object seemed to have three colors red,
yellow, green. There was no pattern to their travel. Some were
moving very fast and then would stop and change direction
rapidly. Others would be moving fast and then stop and the
lights would dim very low. It was nothing I have ever witnessed
before. They were flying much too close to be aircraft flying
at different heights and speeds. Thanks to UFOWisconsin.com
http://www.ufowisconsin.com/county/reports/r2002_0109_wood.html

OKLAHOMA BURNING UFO

MERRITT -- Jim Hickman reports that on January 8, 2002, a UFO
was seen by two teenagers, a brother and sister, who were
returning home at 8:40 PM. They were traveling down Merritt
Road south of the town when they noticed what appeared to be a
barn fire ahead of them. As they approached within 1/2 mile
they observed that it was actually an object behind the barn.
It was bigger than the barn and was emitting a "real bright"
white/yellow/orange flashing light, which appeared to move
upwards from behind the barn. The object then turned sideways
with blue and red flashing lights in three rows around the
outer edge of the object. The UFO was flying under 1000 feet in
altitude, when if flew upward to a point near overhead and then
dimmed till disappearing. No noise was heard and the object was
in sight for several minutes. No electrical interference was
noted, no missing time reported and the skies were clear. They
noticed more red and blue lights in the road ahead, exactly!
where the object had just been. This turned out to be an
Oklahoma Highway Patrol car that had stopped a speeder. The
officer didn't appear to have noticed the aerial object, which
should have been in plain sight of the officer. A neighbor lady
reports seeing the same object the night before. Note: As I was
receiving this report by phone I noticed quite a bit of
background clicking and unusual noises on the phone. The
witness had just said the word "flying saucer" when the line
just went dead. This happened at least 3 times during the
conversation, each time just as UFO's were being mentioned. I
went to my hard line phone and it did the same thing my
cordless did. I have never had phone line trouble. Thanks to
Jim Hickman Author, "5000 years of UFO's" MUFON Research
Specialist for Media Operations
<http://www.thehickmanreport.com/>

LOUISIANA CIGAR SHAPED CRAFT

JENA -- The witness was hunting from his deer stand at 5:30 AM
on December 28, 2001. There was a very bright moon visible in
the clear sky when he saw a falling star. A few minutes later
in the north sky about 30 degrees above horizon he saw a cigar
shaped craft moving very slow then stopping. The witness
reports, "Then it moved very fast across the sky going up then
down very fast and stopping again like it was looking for
something. I used my gun scope to look at the craft it was a
very long way from my but very shiny and long bright silver."
Thanks to NUFORC www.ufocenter.com

TEXAS SEVERAL LARGE CRAFT SEEN

PASADENA -- On New Year's Eve the witness was driving west when
he saw a second long elaborate fireworks display. He reports,
"What I saw was a huge rectangular shaped object at least 300
yards long and 50 yards wide. It was vertical with several
bright white lights inside a red rectangular outer rim." It was
350 feet in the air and probably over the city of Pearland,
Texas, which is about 10 miles from where I saw the object. It
was incredibly beautiful in the cloudy sky and I wish I could
have observed it longer. I believe it was either a craft or a
holograph. Even though it was New Year's Eve I had not been
imbibing and was completely sober. Although after witnessing
the event I could have used a good stiff drink.

DALLAS -- The witness was on an American Airlines Flight 1566
on December 31, 2001, from Dallas to Washington, DC. They took
off at 2:15 PM and climbed above the clouds to 33,000 feet. To
the northeast, the witness noticed a solid white round object
flying several thousand feet lower, and thought it might be a
bird or balloon. It seemed to over or float. The witness
stated, "Eventually, it is directly in line with my window but
at the same distance away. I surmise that at 500 mph, we have
caught up with it, and it has not moved. I didn't see it move
at that point. The white object then flies west, is still for a
moment and then, shoots out in a diagonal of a northwesterly
route and disappears in seconds into the horizon. Thanks to
Peter Davenport NUFORC, www.ufocenter.com

PASADENA -- On January 7, 2002, the witness's wife, and son
were leaving a restaurant and noticed a group of lights in the
sky. As they headed east on Spencer highway towards La Porte,
they watched three lights, and the highest, "faded" a little
and headed north rapidly, until we could not see it. The one on
the south dropped lower and then "shot" south very fast and was
gone at 7:15 PM. The middle one just hung there, moving only
slightly to the left and right and up and down. It got brighter
and then dimmer; it was yellowish in color with a hint of a red
and blue shimmer. My wife suggested that it might be a
helicopter with the searchlight, there were 13 or more aircraft
all converging towards the light near La Porte field which only
caters to personal aircraft. Thanks to Far Shores
http://messenger.msn.com FarShores UFO News -

SPRING -- On Sunday, January 6, 2002, my sister saw a silver
sphere in the sky around 2:00 PM, about twenty miles north of
downtown Houston off I-45. She said it looked silver or
metallic in color, and flew around in circles then suddenly
disappeared. The next day, she took me outside at 3:00 PM, to
show me where she saw it and there it was again in the same
spot! I saw it this time, and my description is the same as
hers. It is the size of a balloon at arm's length, but actually
the size of maybe half of a Volkswagen. The object looked more
round than any other shape. The UFO was flying haphazardly like
a bird fighting the wind, but definitely wasn't a bird. The UFO
made no sound and was flying at 1000 feet or lower on a clear
blue sky. It was shiny like it was made of shiny metal. It was
also seen in Pearland on Sunday, 30 miles south of us according
to the local ABC News channel 13 here in Houston with video.

HOUSTON -- KTRK TV, reported some Pearland residents are still
scratching their heads after spotting a strange object in the
sky on Sunday. But was it a UFO? Rocky Flint captured images
Sunday afternoon January 6, 2002, with his video recorder in
Pearland. It appears to be a burning object in the sky. His
wife, Cynthia, says it was hard to miss, "It resembled a
floating fireball." The fiery ball appears to remain stationary
for several minutes before moving downward and then
disappearing. I've never in my whole life seen anything like
it." Eyewitness News made calls to both airports and neither
one could shed any light on the mystery. The Brazoria County
Sheriff's Department also received some calls, but they
couldn't find anything. Flint's husband has his own theory. He
said that it looked like a UFO." We made another call to NORAD,
the North American Aerospace Defense Command. They also failed
to provide answers. Thanks to Scott Corrales, Institute of
Hispanic ! Ufology. skyblue789@edistoelectric.net (Dwight
Simkins Jan 07.02 URL:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/010702_news_ufo.html Video

CANADA DISK AND FLYING TRIANGLE

VANCOUVER, BC -- The witness was heading west on Barnet Highway
while returning from Christmas dinner on December 25, 2001. At
7:30 PM, the witness noticed an object in the northeast. His
wife confirmed seeing a triangular shaped flying object with
green and white lights. It was not moving and was just hovering
perfectly still. It was flying above the mountains, but they
could not stop on the highway. The witness said, "We lost sight
of the triangle through the trees in just under a minute."

VICTORIA, BC -- My wife and I observed a dark brown/black disk
shaped object on December 31, 2001. It was moving above a 9
story high-rise at 11:20 PM, and was the size of a two-dollar
coin held at arm's length. I was wearing my glasses, which are
not a precise prescription and saw a dome on its top and a disk
shaped underside that seemed to dip slightly back and forth
while moving generally south. It tipped slightly at a forward
angle. At the same time it swooped a few degrees to the left
and back before resuming a straight course south. I called to
my wife Leann, who came quickly. She also saw the dome on the
top, but she thought it may have been a balloon. A few things
seem to militate against it being a balloon: 1) it was moving
very quickly and it was not windy (at least not at ground
elevation) 2) it appeared to slow down, almost hover, and then
accelerate 3) it moved side to side 4) it was disk shaped and
dark. Later, a fellow mentioned that he and some cowork! ers had
seen the object at 11:30 AM. They were working a block to the
west near downtown Victoria. His coworkers were looking at it
with some degree of excitement, as they also were not certain
what it was either but decided it must have been a balloon.

PUERTO RICO UFO

SUMMIT HILLS, SAN JUAN -- On January 4, 2002, the two
witnesses, Magdalena Gotay standing on the staircase to her
house, saw a square flying object and Dr. Carlos Fern=E1ndez a
psychologist who was standing on the street in front of his
house, perceived it as an oval. At 2:30 AM, they saw a flat
dark gray metallic UFO with many yellowish lights fly over
head. It was three times the size of an airliner heading south
very slowly. It was moving diagonally and zigzagging up and
down at an altitude of 2000 feet. It made a strange noise that
they could not compare to anything else. It hid behind a cloud
after 7 to 10 minutes and was not seen again. Thanks to
www.ovni.net. Translation (C) 2001. Scott Corrales, IHU.
Special Lucy Guzm=E1n,

BRAZIL ASTONISHING UFOs

PERNAMBUCO -- Unexplained lights, cigar shaped luminous
objects, small points crossing space at prodigious speed have
been seen along the coast, particularly in the municipality of
Brejo da Madre de Deus. President of the Grupo Ufologico de
Guaruj=E1 (GUG), Edison Boaventura took advantage of a transfer
to Recife and collected reports from persons who saw UFOs. For
example, Attorney Wilson Andrade Souza, a resident of Boa
Viagem, claims he has seen UFOs on repeated occasions and
speaks delightedly about his experiences. "My wife and I were
standing on the porch to our house when we saw an object in the
sky, resembling a cigar, surrounded by 20 smaller disc-shaped
objects, flying in disarray. It was a beautiful sight," he
states. Souza has also seen UFOs over the Guararapes Airport in
the municipality of Cupira, 168 kilometers north of Recife.
"Some employees on a ranch saw one land and disgorge little men
who helped themselves to the guava trees." Boaventura's
investigat! ions also included a complete sweep of Brejo da
Madre de Deus, famous for being one of the most important
archaeological sites of the Northeast, and will probably wind
up being known as a UFO hotspot nationwide. Thanks to. Scott
Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology. Translation (C) 2002

ENGLAND MAN 'SEES UFO' DURING POWER CUT

WILTSHIRE -- Police were called by a Chippenham resident
claiming he had seen a UFO at the same time as 4,000 homes were
plunged into darkness by a power outage. The man, who lives in
Park Lane, claimed he had seen low flying white, blue, red and
orange lights on Wednesday, January 4, 2002. Homes in
Chippenham, Pewsham, and Derry Hill were left without heat and
light when the power failed at 7:30 PM. Southern Electric
Company Engineers traced the fault to an underground cable
caused by third party damage. Thanks to FarShores UFO News
www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/index.htm, and Newsquest
(Wiltshire) Ltd via Powermarketers.com /Jan 04.02

SCOTLAND UFO SIGHTING

PENICUICK -- Martin Rogan reports that he saw a ball of flames
fly upward and disappear for the third night running at the
exact same time in the exact same place. The sightings were on
Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, January 6, 7, and 8th, 2002 at
2:30 AM. Thanks to Dave Ledger dledger@ufoscotland.co.uk) UFO
and McDave@blueyonder.co.uk.

SPAIN MULTIPLE SIGHTING

SEVILLE -- A=F1os Luz reports, a UFO was seen by a multitude of
drivers along Seville's Route S-30 in the vicinity of
Montequinto on January 8, 2002, at 15:15 hours (3:15 PM). The
UFO was cylindrical in shape, with two whitish lights in its
"bow" and "stern" respectively. It was metallic and wingless
with two protuberance visible on its nose similar to a Concorde
jet. Two other protuberances were seen on its aft section. It
traveled toward Seville at such low altitude that it was
perfectly visible. Its size was judged to be roughly that of a
twin-propeller military helicopter. Thanks to. Scott Corrales,
Institute of Hispanic Ufology. Translation (C) 2002 and Jose
Roldan.

MARS FOLLOW THE WATER

Robert Roy Britt reports that's good advice. But hard to heed
on such a dry and dusty planet. Mars now looks downright dead.
Liquid water, if it exists, is probably a mile deep or more,
scientists say. But there are two places where water is known
to exist in mass quantities, right at the surface: The polar
caps. Though summer melts a thin layer of carbon dioxide frost
at the poles, a thick layer of mostly water ice remains. At the
North Pole, the permanent ice cap is larger than Texas and more
than a half-mile thick. Little critters, lathered in natural
sunscreen and swathed in biological antifreeze, could be
lurking just a few feet under the ice. These microscopic
Martians might hibernate for months or even thousands of years,
waiting for a brief thaw, a personal spring vacation. Other
life could be doing the backstroke, or whatever microbes do in
their spare time, in languid pools of water melted by
subsurface volcanic activity, all just a few yards down.
Though! they might sound a bit like fish tales, these ideas are
growing in popularity among scientists who have explored
similar extreme environments, and the so-called extremophiles
that inhabit them, on Earth.

In the permafrost of Siberia, for example, a species of moss was
found dormant but alive after 40,000 years. "Life survives and
even thrives in a variety of icy microhabitats in Earth's polar
regions," says Warwick F. Vincent, a professor of biology at
Laval University in Canada. He and his colleagues recently
discovered bacteria and even more advanced life in pockets of
water below the icy surface of the Arctic. An obvious question
follows for anyone interested in finding life on Mars: "If we're
following the water ... why is there not a heavy search in the
areas where we know there is water ice?" wonders Meredith Payne,
an Arizona State University researcher. As NASA struggles to
refocus its Mars program, one supremely logical mantra has
emerged to guide the search for Martian life: The next robots
that will explore the surface of Mars, one from the European
Space Agency and a pair from NASA, are planned for 2003 and
2004, but are not targeting the Polar Regions. See
www.filersfiles.com, Mars Rendered in 3-D Using Spacecraft

MAILINGLIST/NEWSLETTER PROGRAMS

Today we would like to let you know where you can find one of
the finest mailinglist/newsletter programs on the Internet
which we ourselves use. Boost your business with one of the
finest email-marketing and customer support software products
available! WWW.ULICES.COM GO AND SEE A FULL WORKING DEMOS at
http://www.ulices.com. A strong support team supports you FREE
of charge. Enjoy great marketing products and professional
service! YOUR SUCCESS IS JUST ONE CLICK AWAY! Find a great
affiliate program and earn cash! Earn up to $15.00 for every
successful sales link to us. Earn a 15% commission on every
product sold. Sign up is quick & easy: 2 simple steps. Start
business in 5 minutes. NO FEES, NO OBLIGATIONS, NO SERVICING,
NO RISK! For information just check out their affiliates
program at: http://www.ulices.com/resellers.htm

NEW UFO STORE IS NOW OPEN The new UFO Store is open on our web
site with some of the best UFO books and paraphernalia
available. Help support UFO research by purchasing through us!
Filer's Files is dedicated to uncovering the truth about UFOs
and has sent them out free since January 1997. Your support is
needed to cover expenses, and when you shop in our store, you
get the satisfaction of quality products, with the knowledge
that you have helped support the search for the truth. Come
help our adventure, while supporting UFO research! Order online
today, at http://www.filersfiles.com/ufostore/index.htm

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $35 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2002 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the complete
files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its
editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. 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. Caution,
most of these are initial reports and require further
investigation.

Regards, George Filer








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:06:43 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:01:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch


 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:55:28 -0800

<snip>

 >>Well, Michel this is an incident that could be explained
 >>by some rather prosaic means, if you call a large methane
 >>bubble prosaic.

<snip>

 >Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exist for that
 >time period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in?
 >I haven't been able to find anything for that day or the
 >few days before or after. Larry hatch might have
 >something in his *U* base.


Hello Don:

If somebody will give specific dates and general location, I can
look up whatever records I have and summarize those. A place
name like "Kinross" is sometimes changed here to match the
actual location of the incident, or to give a landmark closer to
the events if over large bodies of water.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 3

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 21:36:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:09:19 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 3

Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 7, Number 3
January 15, 2002
Editor: Joseph Trainor


YELLOW-ORANGE UFO SEEN BY TWO OVER VIENNA

On Friday, January 11, 2002, at 5:50 p.m., Herbert F.C. stepped
outside his home in the Hietzing section of Vienna, the capital
of Austria, and then he "saw the object heading heavenward. I
heard several loud booms, and then I looked up and saw a bright
yellow-orange light."

"At first I thought it was a passing airplane. And then out of
it came several smaller lights. I called my son who was upstairs
in his room. My 14-year-old son went to his window and saw
'something like a star' rising upward rapidly. A moment later,
four more bright UFOs passed directly over our house. These
lights hovered briefly and then departed to the north."

Herbert added that he contacted the Flugsicherung (Air Traffic
Control) at Vienna's international airport, but the controllers
"had no reports of UFOs on their radar screens at that time."
(Email Form Report)


RETURN OF THE CHUPACABRA?

On Tuesday, December 25, 2001, at about 2 a.m., Angel Luis Ramos
Dominguez heard the guinea hens squawking in his backyard
chicken coop in Barceloneta, a town on Carraterra (Road) 681 and
Highway 22 approximately 36 miles (57 kilometers) west of San
Juan, Puerto Rico. Thinking nothing of it, Ramos Dominguez went
back to sleep.

But when he checked the coop five hours later, at 7 a.m., the
72-year-old farmer "discovered that 27 guinea hens had been
killed. All of the dead birds had two small puncture marks on
the left side of the neck."

Ramos Dominguez calculated that "the mutilations took place
around 2 .m. on Christmas Day." (See the 6:30 a.m. news
broadcast on Radio NotiUno, 1320 AM, on the dial. Muchas gracias
a Lucy Guzman y Luisseppe Quinones para esas noticias.)


UFO LANDINGS REPORTED IN NORTHERN BRAZIL

Residents of Cupira, a town in the state of Pernambuco in
northern Brazil, have reported landings of disc-shaped UFOs in
recent weeks. Townspeople have seen hatches open on the discs
and witnessed the emergence of small humanoid creatures.

This is just part of the ongoing UFO flap occurring today in
Brazil's northern states of Paraiba and Pernambuco.

Brazilian ufologist Edison Boaventura said "he has also seen
UFOs over the Guararapes Airport in the municipality of Cupira,
168 kilometers (105 miles) north of Recife," the state capital
of Pernambuco. "Some employees on a ranch belonging to a friend
of mine saw one land and disgorge little men who helped
themselves to (the fruit of) the guava trees."

"Exotic-shaped objects have been reported by residents of the
coast and the (Serra da Rosa) mountains, mainly in Brejo de
Madre do Deus."

"There is something strange in the skies of Pernambuco.
Unexplained lights, cigar-shaped luminous objects, small points
crossing space at prodigious speeds, all have been seen along
the coast, particularly in the municipality of Brejo de Madre do
Deus," located 219 kilometers (131 miles) northeast of Recife.

(Editor's Note: This stretch of northern Brazil is known as the
Sertao. The city of Recife is 1,050 kilometers (630 miles)
northeast of Rio de Janeiro.)

"Some are sure that unidentified flying objects or UFOs are
involved. In other words, saucers. Visitors from space? ETs?
Borrowing the slogan from The X-Files...could it be that the
truth is out there?"

"To Sao Paulo-based ufologist Edison Boaventura, the answer is
yes. The president of Grupo Ufologico de Guaruju (GUG),
Boaventura is also a respected (financial) analyst at the Banco
do Brasil. He took advantage of a temporary four-month transfer
to Recife and spent his free time collecting reports from
persons claiming to have seen UFOs flying over the state."

"'In the Sertao (Northeast--J.T.) Pernambuco and Paraiba stood
out for the number of (UFO) cases. Sightings are particularly
intense in places near the beaches,' says Boaventura, showing an
album with hundreds of UFO photos from all over the world."

"One of the witnesses interviewed by the ufologist was attorney
Wilson Andrade Souza, a resident of Boa Viagem, who claims to
have seen UFOs on repeated occasions and speaks delightedly
about his experiences."

"'My wife and I were standing on the porch to our house when we
saw an object in the sky resembling a cigar, surrounded by
twenty smaller disc-shaped objects, flying in disarray. It was a
beautiful sight,' he says."

"The oldest residents of the rural areas tell tales of fireballs
racing through the sky over the city (Boa Viagem). When Edison
Boaventura showed them his album, 'the majority of them pointed
to an image of a UFO taken in Jalisco (Mexico) as very similar
to the phenomenon being seen in their region.'"

"Dulce de Souza Pinto, director of the city's museum, lives in
the bairro Barriguda (neighborhood) where she can see the
'torches'--a local name given by some to the fireballs."

"'At night people could wait on their porches to see them
appear. They were blue and red torches, round, emerging from the
top of the mountain range and darting quickly from one side to
the other. After that, they would come closer and plunge
suddenly,' she recalls."

"There are those who have claimed to have witnessed UFO
landings, such as farmer Jose Antonio dos Santos. He told Dulce
and the ufologist that he saw one (UFO) 'resembling a plate'
descend on a boulder in the Serra da Rosa. He saw 'some legs'
protruding from the thing and afterward saw a porthole open. He
fired a shot with his rifle, and the disc took off."

"'The guy knew what a flying saucer was,' Dulce said." (See the
Brazilian newspaper Diario de Pernambuco for January 10, 2002,
"Astonishing UFOs visit Pernambuco." Muito obrigado a Scott
Corrales, autor dos libros Chupacabras and Other Mysteries e
Forbidden Mexico, e tambem Alberto Francisco do Carmo por esos
casos.)


UFO ACTIVITY CONTINUES NEAR MEXICO'S MOUNT POPOCATEPETL

Two new instances of UFO activity have been reported in the
vicinity of Mount Popocatepetl, southeast of Mexico City.

On Saturday, December 29, 2001, at 10 p.m., a commercial
aircraft passing over the city of Puebla, 200 kilometers (120
miles) east of Mexico City, encountered an oval luminous UFO.

According to Mexican ufologist Alfonso Salazar, the crew of the
aircraft "radioed the control tower at the international airport
in Mexico City, specifically asking about 'strange traffic in
the zone.' The air traffic controllers responded that there was
nothing unusual on the tower's radar screens."

On Tuesday, January 8, 2002, the robot TV camera monitoring
volcanic activity at Mount Popocatepetl, a stratovolcano 5,542
meters (18,288 feet) high, "picked up the image of three UFOs
rising from the summit. The UFOs were of an obscure color and
they stood out against the clear blue sky as they hovered above
the cone of the volcano. They remained in that position for
several minutes, and then they vanished completely."

Mount Popocatepetl is located in the state of Morelos about 50
kilometers (30 miles) west of Puebla. (See Noticiarios OVNI for
January 9, 2002. Muchas gracias a Alfonso Salazar para esas
noticias.) (Editor's Comment: For years there have been rumors
of an alien base inside Mount Popocatepetl, protected by the
mountain's hot lava flows.)


RECTANGULAR UFO APPEARS OVER SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO

A UFO, described by witnesses as "square-shaped" or "oval," was
sighted over the Summit Hills section of San Juan, the capital
of Puerto Rico, on Friday, January 4, 2002 at 2:30 a.m.

The flyover was witnessed by two residents of Summit
Hills--Magdalena Gotay, who was standing on the staircase of her
house, and Dr. Carlos Fernandez, who was standing in the street
in front of his home. Sra. Gotay described the UFO as "a square"
while Dr. Fernandez described it as "oval."

Both described the night sky above San Juan as "clear,
cloudless, with good visibility." The UFO, they said, "had
yellowish lights surrounding it, but the lights did not cast any
lights, nor did they light up the (immediate) area. The object
appeared to be made of a flat dark gray metallic substance."

The witnesses said the UFO was "three times the size of an
airliner if the airliner were traveling at the same altitude
(height) as the object, some 2,000 feet (600 meters) up. It was
moving from north to south diagonally and zigzagging up and
down. They say that when it was over the mogote (karst
hill--J.T.) located behind the Borinquen Towers apartment
building," it began "heading southeast, passing directly over
their heads. It hid behind a cloud after some seven to ten
minutes and was not seen again. Its speed was very slow, slower
than an airliner."

Both Sra. Gotay and Dr. Hernandez detected "an acrid,
sulfur-like odor as it flew overhead."

"Magdalena Gotay awoke the next morning with a strong headache.
She does not know if was related to the sighting." (Muchas
gracias a Scott Corrales y Lucy Guzman para eso caso.)


UFOs REPORTED IN WISCONSIN

On Wednesday, January 9, 2002, at 7 p.m., four people in
Marshfield, Wisconsin (population 19,300), a town on Highway 13
about 80 miles (128 kilometers) east of Eau Claire, spotted a
formation of UFOs in the night sky.

"My friend and her son were coming home from Marshfield at
approximately 7 p.m. and when they arrived, they told us they
had seen a lot of unidentifiable flashing lights in the sky and
to go out on the roof and look. There were four of us who
witnessed these lights--two adults and two teenagers."

"They were very small lights in the sky. Each object seemed to
have three colors--red, yellow and green. There was no pattern
to their travel. Some were moving very fast and then would stop
and change direction rapidly. Others would be moving very fast
and then slow, and their lights would dim very low. It was
nothing I have ever witnessed before. They were flying much too
close (together) to be regular airplanes or helicopters and were
flying at different heights (altitudes) and speeds."

On Saturday, January 5, 2002, a witness in Waterford, Wis.
(population 2,500), a small town on Highway 36 about 25 miles
(40 kilometers) southwest of Milwaukee, reported, "I was sitting
out by the farm areas with my son just north of Wind Lake when I
saw something that was square-shaped. It stopped for about 30
seconds and then it started moving slowly and then it
disappeared. I would have thought I was seeing things, but my
son, who is 13, pointed it out to me." (Many thanks to Jenny
Hoppe of UFO-Wisconsin for these reports.)


HALF-SPHERICAL UFO SIGHTED IN BILLINGS, MONTANA

"Unusual white lights were spotted hovering over the west end of
Billings, Montana (population 90,000) Saturday," January 5, 2002
"at about 6 p.m." "A woman and her husband were in their pickup
truck when they spotted a lighted half-spherical object hovering
about 1,000 feet (300 meters) above 36th Street West. The object
had one flashing light and hovered for about four minutes."

"'My husband knows airplanes, and he said, 'Those aren't any
airplane lights1' As soon as he said that, it took off,' she
said, 'Within two seconds, we couldn't see it. It was that fast.
I don't know what to make of it.'"

"A Billings man who spends most of his evenings riding a bicycle
in the downtown area said he spotted the flying object but
thought it was just a fast aircraft." (See the Billings, Mont.
Gazette for January 7, 2002. Many thanks to George A. Filer,
editor of Filer's Files, for letting UFO Roundup use this news
story.)


COLEMAN PURSUES LEADS IN 1967 MOTHMAN CASE

Cryptozoologist Loren Coleman returned home to Maine at the
beginning of January following a field trip to the Ohio River
valley in West Virginia. Coleman was investigating the famous
Mothman case of 1967, which is soon to become a feature film,
The Mothman Prophecies.

"A hideous creature called 'the Mothman' may soon be as well
known as Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster."

"The Mothman is a six-foot-tall creature with wings that haunts
the town of Point Pleasant, West Virginia (population 5,000),
usually appearing at or before a major disaster, such as a
bridge collapse that killed 46 people" in December 1967.

"Locals are afraid to discuss the Mothman, but they may not be
able to avoid it next month when a new movie, The Mothman
Prophecies, opens in theaters."

"Mothman expert Loren Coleman speculated that media attention
will turn Point Pleasant, W.V. into a paranormal tourist trap 'a
la' Roswell, N.M. and create" more legends than facts.

"As a result, Coleman is trying to get Point Pleasant residents
to 'spill the beans' about the Mothman before tourism changes
everything." (Many thanks to Loren Coleman for this news
release.)


We'll be back next week with more UFO and paranormal news from
around the planet Earth, brought to you by "the paper that goes
home--UFO Roundup." See you in seven days!


UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2002 by Masinaigan Productions, all
rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup on
their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue in
which the news item appeared. John Hayes

webmaster@ufoinfo.com

UFOINFO:- http://ufoinfo.com

Official Archives for UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports
and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                 Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:37:34 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:36:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:35:20 EST
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>To: James Oberg
 >>From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >>Date: January 16th, 2002


 >>James,

 >>Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >>UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >>the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

<snip>

 >_Good show, EBK!_ And forgive my momentary inebriatory
 >confabulation of your intoberative insegrediousness, your Errol
 >Bruce-Knapp shipness. And another thing... you owe me
 >thirty-sven bucks! With interest, it's now up a $37,209.42. Pay
 >up. We know how much money you make doing that radio show and
 >doing this venue. And it a lot more than I gonna get for the
 >sale of my book. So there!

 >I forgot the name of the voice in my head, so I'll just sign me,


 >Charley

This situation calls for a true story. One which describes the
nature Massa Oboy. Here it is, truer than the voices in my head.

Grampa was an old Sicilian man with very strong feelings.
Unfortunately not too many of these opines were from his noggin.
Grampa used to frequent the local shoemaker, so help me this is
the gospel. The shoemaker was also Sicilian and Gramps would
spend his days commiserating with him. And the shoemaker had
some really weird opinions.

Gramps would come home and tell us that the moon was really made
of mozzarella (not really) and damned if he would announce these
factiods at dinner. Gramma would look at him, I would look at
him, dad and my aunt would look at him, and he would say,
"What!??" in Sicilian. The words are not for printing.

The next thing to happen would be to aks Gramps where or from
whom he got this information. He would always answer the same
way, in Sicilian, "The shoemaker told me!"

After some years of this, we never aksed Gramps again. Instead,
one of us would comment, "Grampa, the shoemaker told you this,
right?" And of course, he would answer in the affirmative.

Now ... and here's the kicker. One day Gramps came home from the
shoemaker and announced that there was life outside the earth.
This was not in consort with the usual folderol. And so we aksed
him what brought him to that conclusion. His answer surprised
us. First he said, "The shoemaker told me." But the next part
was bizarre. He said, the shoemaker told him that people from
other planets were kidnapping the inhabitants of our planet.

I was about nine years old at the time, and my family always
trusted me in my judgment about my own experiences, but never
really believed me. Sort of. Because mom, who is now mending
thank God, would always look at me in what always appeared to me
to be a knowing way. The implication always was that she
understood.

The interesting part of this story is that not one member of our
family that evening at dinner made a single utterance. They all
just stared at Grampa and then at mom and then at me. And went
back to dinner.

This was an historic first. There were always six people in our
home. My two grandparents, mom and dad, an aunt and me. And
never in the history of grampa's story telling did anyone ever
not make a sound.

To this day I find this interesting in the extreme. And it was
mom who reminded me of it. Before surgery, as she was waiting to
be wheeled into the operating theater, she told me, "Jamey, I
don't expect to come out of this alive!" And then went to her
story of Grampa and the little Aley Inns.

Incidently, the first maroon who calls me "Jamey" is gonna get
whacked by one of my made members.

Mom did come out of it. And she still speaks of that event. In
fact, she said that she dreamed about Grampa and Gramma before
she had her serious heart trouble, a few weeks ago. And the
first thing Gramps said was that, "Jamey, Grampa told me that
there was only one time the shoemaker was right."

It's in the book, but hey, what the hell. There's much more like
this and it's gonna cost yous. Heh, heh. A lot. Boy oh boy I
can't wait to gouge you puppies, most especially after tempting
you with these treats.

Now I truly understand where and from whom Massa OldCodge gets
his information. Not from the Astronauts, not from NASA, but
from the shoemaker, Herr Shtumpdinbgle Uber DoomCough.

Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt ... for the time being.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                  Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 18:02:34 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:39:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg


 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:06:53 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:32:14 -0600

 >>>From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>To:  James Oberg
 >>>From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >>>Date: January 16th, 2002

 >>>James,

 >>>Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >>>UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >>>the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

 >Hello Alfred,

 >>OK - this time you go too far! This is Oberg bashing, pure and
 >>simple! Moreover, I'll bet this is a selective application of
 >>your authoritarian so-called rules, and that you'd let that
 >>coffee-bush-banging Juan Valdez prance around in UpDates with
 >>line lengths reminiscent of the epics of Homer! Shame!

 >See, you go and make fun of my grammatical handicap (in public)
 >and you smother it in a cheesy racial slur, but if I say
 >anything about the pink, lacy Victoria's Secret underwear all
 >you poets are expected wear by the writers guild, then suddenly
 >_I'm_ the bad guy!

Hey!  In the first place the underwear's in the by-laws!  In the
second place I resent being accused of making racial slurs, you
siesta taking, taco bending, re-fried beaner!  (...to which you
reply, "Hey! Who's re-fried?") <g>.

...In the third place I know a good spot where those Homeric
lines can be effectively broken off, you baldly envious Oberg
basher not fit to fold his trench coat (or polish his decoder
ring), but you're gonna have to roll your shoulders down!

Ha-rumpf!

<snip>

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

P.S. Seriously though?  I love it when Oberg comes up on my
spell checker and I get to hit the ignore button!  <g>.

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                      Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Actually, the special flight was already ordered and I think one
 >of the compelling reasons was to get Marcel the hell out of
 >Roswell. And, contrary to what Tom wrote, I think the rawin and
 >balloon came from Roswell. Robert Porter, who went to Fort Worth
 >on the flight with Marcel described materials being handed up,
 >into the cockpit that sound suspiciously like the radar
 >reflector and the balloon envelop. Porter mentioned a package
 >wrapped in brown paper that was triangular, about three or four
 >feet on a side. This sounds just like a folded up rawin
 >target... which also accounts for the brown paper on Ramey's
 >floor that is visible in the photographs.

 >Porter also talked of a couple of wrapped boxes that were very
 >light weight, which could have contained the balloon envelop.
 >So, I believe that we have compelling evidence that the balloon
 >and target were brought from Roswell, we have compelling
 >evidence to suggest that such material would be available in
 >Roswell based on their participation in the Pacific atomic
 >tests, and, if Ramey ordered the material from Roswell to show
 >reporters, we have fairly compelling evidence of a coordinated
 >effort.

If I may, I'd like to question part of your theory.

You assert that Roswell AAFB would have Rawins - implying that
they would be familiar with the device and its uses. In July
1947, Roswell did not have any ground-based radars. Indeed, in
order to practice radar counter-measures, the 509th had to beg
time from either the White Sands or Alamogordo radars. Given
this, it is highly unlikely that anyone at RAAFB would require
the use of a Rawin, let alone have one laying around. Besides,
Rawins would not be of any use to a bomber wing- their primary
military use is for artillery units.

There may have been personnel in the 509th that had seen and/or
used a Rawin during WWII (like Newton). It is also possible
that there were people there who may have seen one during post-
war training, although it is quite unlikely that no one in the
509th actually handled one then. Brazel's interview makes it
quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
not available at the RAFFB.

Regardless, it is very obvious that Rawins were not in use at
Roswell in '47, and it is unlikely in-the-extreme that one would
be available at the base to use as a 'substitution'.

I am, however, pleased to see that you now assert the material
transported to Ft Worth by Marcel was indeed a Rawin/Neoprene
balloon, and that what is in Bond's photos is the same material.
Procter's story is 'compelling' evidence.

So- if the material transported to Ft Worth was a Rawin and
Balloon, then there is only _one_ place where these could have
be found in the Roswell area- Foster's ranch.

 >But remember, Colonel Dubose said that the material displayed on
 >General Ramey's floor was a weather balloon cover story designed
 >to get the reporters off their backs.

Shandara got quite a different story from DuBose.

 >And remember that Jesse
 >Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
 >told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
 >recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
 >to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
Jessies's first version was that the pictures of him were the
'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.


Regards,

Bruce Hutchinson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                  Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Cameron

From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
Date: 16 Jan 2002 17:58:23 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:05:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Cameron

On Wed, 16 January 2002, UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:


 >From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >To:   James Oberg
 >From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >Date: January 16th, 2002

 >James,

 >Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

 >You have had submissions returned to you, un-posted, together
 >with quotes from the Posting Rules - which you have chosen to
 >ignore.

 >UFO UpDates is a free service - I get paid nothing for running
 >it and all that I ask is that you abide by all the Posting
 >Rules. You don't.

 >Therefore, if future messages from you don't conform to the
 >Posting Rules I've included, and updated to make them even
 >clearer, below, your submissions, again, will not be passed on.
 >I simply don't have the time to continually clean up
 >mis-compiled messages.

 >Errol Bruce-Knapp,
 >Moderator UFO UpDates - Toronto


James. When you get out of this dog house, you can start telling
everyone Marcia Smith's version of the story Danny Sheehan has
been telling for years.

First you cover up the truth of Marciagate. Then you refuse to
follow simple rules. You are a bad man!


Grant Cameron

Presenting the inside story of how the
U.S. Presidents have handled the UFO situation.

http://www.presidentialUFO.8m.com/

Grant Cameron
sqquishy@altavista.com
Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 22:47:29 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:09:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 17:16:25 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:36:40 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>I can't tell you where Ramey got this stuff from (not even
 >>Dubose knew that when asked). However, I can give you some good
 >>arguments that this probably wasn't from Mogul.

 >>Mogul #4 (supposedly the crash object according to debunkers)
 >>consisted of about 2 dozen neoprene balloons, 3 radar targets
 >>(though there is zero evidence that it actually had any radar
 >>targets), and assorted payload and altitude control equipment.

 >>1. Instruments: There are no instruments of any kind pictured in
 >>the photos. Marcel and Cavitt report recovering no instruments
 >>(except for a little black box Marcel said Cavitt found). In
 >>1947, Ramey went on the radio and stated that there were no
 >>instruments recovered. With no instruments, what exactly links
 >>the Rawin and balloon to Mogul? The debris is indistinguishable
 >>from an ordinary Rawin weather balloon.

 >>2. Quantity of debris: Again despite assertions to the contrary,
 >>there is insufficient debris to make up even one radar target
 >>(e.g., the stick lengths computed by some photoanalyst for the
 >>AF came up with less than half the sticks required to make up
 >>one complete Rawin). Ramey or his people also repeatedly
 >>referred to the debris as a singular balloon and target. A quote
 >>of Ramey's from United Press in an evening edition of a west
 >>coast newspaper on July 8 (which went to press before Irving
 >>Newton ever came in) has Ramey stating that it appeared to be
 >>the "remnants of a weather balloon and radar reflector." UP also
 >>quoted Ramey that night as saying that a _part_ of a balloon was
 >>found nearby.

 >Has anyone ever suggested that what was displayed in Ramey's
 >office was supposed to be everything recovered outside Roswell?
 >Weren't these samples simply to be displayed at a press
 >conference? In other words, what's quantity got to do with it?

Sheridan Cavitt, the AF star witness, claimed the balloon
wreckage covered an area no bigger than his living room. Col.
Weaver in his summary statement, then used Cavitt's "small area
of debris" as supporting the conclusion that they found a Mogul
balloon. (See also more extensive comments at the end.)

It's also interesting that they managed to lay out most of _one_
complete ML-307 radar reflector, but not just a little more than
one, which would indicate they really had found more than one
target and maybe this was debris from Mogul.

Yet Mack Brazel claimed he rolled the stuff up into one small
bundle in his Daily Record interview. "When the debris was
gathered up the tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle
about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick."

If more than one reflector had been found, then it should have
all been mixed up together in that bundle. But instead, the
debris on display is completely accounted for and then some by
one and only one ML-307 reflector. How did they manage that
unless they started with only one reflector to begin with?

And if its only one reflector, then what clearly links the
debris to the alleged lost multi-target Mogul?

 >>Irving Newton in 1947 also referred to the debris as coming from
 >>a singular balloon/reflector (as did the FBI telegram). When I
 >>asked Newton in the present day whether there was more than one
 >>balloon or radar target, he told me definitely not. He thought
 >>the debris came from a regular Rawin weather balloon.

 >>So where is the multi-balloon, multi-radar target Mogul? Again,
 >>there is nothing here to clearly link the debris to Mogul in any
 >>way.

 >See above. What does the _quantity_ of debris in Ramey's office
 >have to do with the quantity of debris at the original crash
 >site?

You are missing the point. The photos have been used as evidence
that they found a multi-balloon, multi-Rawin Mogul. But if you
can't account for even one complete Rawin balloon on display,
then the debris could have come from any ordinary Rawin balloon
and been substituted for the "real" debris, as Marcel and Dubose
said happened.

E.g., White Sands Missile Range maintained a weather station at
Orogrande, only 35 miles south of Alamogordo. 72 hours prior to
scheduled V-2 launches, they started sending up Rawins to check
upper atmosphere wind speeds and directions. There was a
scheduled V-2 launch on July 3 (and another on July 10, 1947).
So starting June 30, multiple Rawins would have been sent up
from Orogrande. Ranchers would often report when a weather
balloon came down on their property, so conceivably this could
have been the source of the very recent, weathered, _singular_
balloon and Rawin on display in Ramey's office. It didn't have
to come from Mogul.

 >Moreover, why did Ramey order up a weather balloon and rawin
 >radar reflector as his preferred cover-up material -- when he
 >could have used virtually anything?

My theory based on the historical documentary evidence - at
that point they were debunking not just Roswell but the
nationwide epidemic of flying saucer sightings. They were trying
to kill the whole thing. To do that they needed a general,
multipurpose explanation that could be used everywhere. A
garbage can lid or one of Mrs. Brazel's pie pans wouldn't work
for that.

(Furthermore, in the case of Roswell, they had to account for
how the "disk" could end up on a remote ranch. As in the case of
the other reported flying discs, the explanation literally had
to "fly." So just anything wouldn't do.)

The sequence of documented historical events went like this.

On July 6 and July 7, an AP photo of the Circleville, Ohio,
crashed radar target was being widely circulated, particularly
in the Midwest, with the radar target touted as a possible
explanation for the flying disk reports. This photo, in fact,
appeared on the front page of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on
July 7. There no doubt would have been some awareness of it
amongst Ramey's inner circle of officers. The press was already
proposing it as a possible explanation -- so why not make use of
a ready-made explanation to kill the saucer stories?

(The Star-Telegram wasn't the only Texas paper that ran the
photo. E.g., the San Antonio Light did as well on July 7. Need I
point out that San Antonio is home to Fort Sam Houston, and back
then the home base of the 4th Army? The 4th Army was also
responsible for military security in Texas and New Mexico.)

The very same day, Col. John Ryan, the Eighth AF Operations
Officer at Fort Worth (and the next C/O at Roswell, replacing
Blanchard the following year), was talking about radar targets
in connection with an article AP ran the next day on possible
explanations for the saucer reports, primarily one man's theory
that they were the same as the "Nazi fireballs" (AKA "foo
fighters").

Then, of course, merely by "coincidence", a radar target shows
up on the office floor of Gen. Ramey late in the afternoon of
July 8. Ramey early on stated his opinion that the so-called
Roswell flying disk was "the remnants of a weather balloon and
radar reflector." Later he brought in weather officer Newton to
make the ID official.

Afterwards Ramey went on a local Fort Worth radio station to
repeat the weather balloon story. AP quoted him at first saying
"I don't say these devices are what people have called disks.
There is no such gadget (as the disks) known to the Army -- at
least this far down the line."

However, AP articles said he also added that the weather device
could be mistaken for almost anything when seen in the air,
thereby implying that they could indeed explain the flying
disks. This was classic Ramey, talking out of both sides of his
mouth and covering all his bases. Ramey was a clever man. (See
another example further down of Ramey doing this.)

That night, shortly after 10:00, a radio newsman from Kalamazoo,
Mich., sent a teletype saying that military intelligence in
Washington was suggesting that the saucers were radar targets
used for weather observation. You can see this telex at:

http://www.project1947.com/roswell/wkzo.htm

Also note the telex talks about contacting Col. M. Duffy in New
Jersey about the radar targets. That's Col. Marcellus Duffy, who
helped develop the targets at Fort Monmouth. The problem is the
Air Force and other debunkers like Karl Pflock are claiming that
Duffy, at about the same time as the telex, was at home with the
kiddies at Wright Field, Ohio, identifying the debris flown in
from Fort Worth as being from Mogul. He could hardly be doing
that if he was in New Jersey as a press contact person on radar
targets. So this whole Col. Duffy story of him allegedly
identifying Mogul debris at Wright Field appears to be another
fabrication, perhaps just more of the military debunking
campaign.

The following morning, the introductory sentence in the main UP
Roswell story spelled out what was going on in unambiguous
terms: "Reports of flying saucers whizzing through the sky fell
off sharply today as the Army and Navy began a concentrated
campaign to stop the rumors."

So that's what was happening. The military was engaged in an
organized attempt to kill the saucer reports. There were stories
from some top military people scoffing at and ridiculing the
saucer reports. At a press conference on July 10, Truman
compared them to the great moon hoax of 1835.

But the major thrust was weather balloon and radar target
demonstrations. Alamogordo on July 9 was just one of these. I've
found at least 9 more, including a portion of a newsreel and a
demonstration at FWAAF where they supposedly didn't have radar
targets. They even had the radar target manufacturer in New York
get into the act and team up with the balloon manufacturer in
New Jersey and stage some launches at a New Jersey amusement
park. The theme in all these demonstrations was that the radar
targets or similar weather balloons likely or undoubtedly
explained all the saucer reports. In some of these
demonstrations, there is a claim of widespread use of the radar
targets with statements that they are used where people are
reporting the saucers.

All this had nothing to do with protecting the purpose of Mogul.
It was about debunking the saucers.

So that's the long answer as to why Ramey used a radar target.
It was the opening salvo in a nationwide military debunking
campaign. It was probably suggested to military intelligence by
the already widely circulating story and photos of the
Circleville radar target crash on July 6 and July 7 along with
the accompanying proposal that it might explain the saucer
reports.

I think Shakespeare's line about "they doth protesteth too much"
is apropro here. Why the obvious coordination of efforts and all
the energy spent in ridiculing nothing? Earlier in the week,
they hardly gave a damn. But something changed drastically
around July 7 or July 8. After that they pulled out the stops
and went overboard on the ridicule.

 >The original press release referred to a relatively intact disc
 >stored in a rancher's shed.

Not exactly, Dennis. It said a flying disk had landed on a
rancher's property and the Army had gained possession. Where did
you get the bit about it saying it was stored in a rancher's
shed?

 >Marcel wasn't going to be able to
 >testify otherwise, so who would have had the slightest inkling
 >that what was shown on Ramey's office floor would bear at least
 >some passing resemblance to what some witnesses later testified
 >was found on the Foster ranch?

See above. There was a lot going on behind the scenes. To
successfully kill any rumors that might leak out of Roswell,
they had to make the subject of flying saucers a topic of public
ridicule as well. That called for an explanation of the saucers
that would work anywhere.

Or you could make a more conservative interpretation and
speculate that they were trying to kill the reports because they
were being overwhelmed by them. Gen. Vandenberg was in northern
Texas a few days before the "incident" of July 8 (why?) and was
quoted by the Austin Statesman on July 7 as saying the Pentagon
had been literally inundated with "thousands" of inquiries.

 >Did Ramey just 'luck out' by ordering up a weather balloon and
 >radar reflector for display? Did he start out with a weather
 >balloon, and say to himself, "No, that's not good enough, better
 >throw in a wrecked rawin reflector, too. You know how the press
 >are these days."

Again, see above. There are suggestions that the radar reflector
story was already in the works for about a day before Ramey
showed one. Military intelligence may have been devising a
comprehensive plan to kill all the stories, not just Roswell.

 >Fact is the press were in his side pocket in those days and he
 >could have shown them _anything_. No particular (let alone
 >urgent) need to fly in a balloon and rawin reflector from
 >somewhere else, at least that I can think of. Especially since
 >none of what he offered up as Roswell wreckage in any way
 >resembled what was mentioned in the original press release.
 >Regrettably, it's too bad that the press didn't ask better
 >questions at the time, or we might know more than we do today.

Agreed, and as you say, the military back then wore a halo after
they had just saved us from the fascists. However, some
interesting items did leak out from Fort Worth, but got
overlooked by the press. A widely reported quote attributed to
Major Marcel by AP have him saying that the debris was
"scattered over a square mile" (a description Marcel repeated to
Leonard Stringfield 30 years later). That's way too big a debris
area even for a Mogul (and in startling contrast to both
Brazel's quotes back then and Cavitt's in the present-day
concerning debris field size).

And Ramey and AAF spokespeople were quoted by all major news
sources, after Ramey spoke on the phone with the Pentagon press
room, as saying that the object would be "20 to 25 feet in
diameter if reconstructed." The small amount debris on Ramey's
floor would never conceivably be that large if "reconstructed"
nor could anybody ever reasonably make that sort of mistake

By another remarkable "coincidence," however, Ramey's size
description matches those given by a few witnesses as to the
size of the recovered craft. I think this was another example of
Ramey covering all his bases. If word did leak about size, he
was already claiming that the radar target could account for
that as well.

There is no evidence, however, that the press noticed or cared
about the logical inconsistencies and glaring contradictions in
the official story. They completely bought into the party line
were only too happy to oblige in debunking the story.

 ><snip>

 >>There is nothing here at all to link this singular balloon and
 >>singular Rawin to Mogul. It is instead a standard singular
 >>balloon/radar target combination.

 >How many balloons and rawins should he have displayed in his
 >office? He was showing samples of what was recovered. Has anyone
 >ever suggested that _everything_ recovered outside Roswell was
 >on display in Ramey's office that day? If so, it's news to me,
 >though welcome if substantiated.

 >Dennis Stacy

Read the Air Force Roswell Report and their emphasis on Sheridan
Cavitt's tiny balloon wreck and its consistency with what Ramey
showed. Also look at pages 13 and 14 in Col. Weaver's summary
statement where he writes:

"From the rather benign description of the 'event' and the
recovery of some material as described by original newspaper
accounts, the 'Roswell Incident' has since grown to mythical (if
not mystical) proportions in the eyes and minds of some
researchers, portions of the media, and at least part of the
American public. There are also now several major variations of
the 'Roswell story.' **For example, it was originally reported
that there was only recovery of debris from one site. This has
since grown from _a minimal amount of debris recovered from a
small area_ to airplane loads of debris from multiple huge
'debris fields.'"**

Also look at Attachment 24, the Col. Albert Trakowski interview,
where he relates the Col. Duffy fable of identifying Mogul
debris at Wright Field:

"Really, the only thing that I knew about it, after it happened,
was that Colonel Duffy called me on the telephone from Wright
Field and gave me a story about a fellow that had come in from
New Mexico, woke him up in the middle of the night, or some such
thing, with **a handful of debris,** and wanted him, Colonel
Duffy, to identify it."

Weaver also uses Trakowski's "handful of debris" statement in
his summary statement (p. 28). Again, the implication left is
that there was hardly any debris.

Weaver also tries to white-wash Ramey's weather balloon story, stating (p.
30): "It appears that the identification of the wreckage as being part of a
weather balloon device" was based on the fact that there was no physical
difference in the radar targets and the neoprene balloons (other than the
numbers and configuration) between Mogul balloons and normal weather
balloons."

In other words, Ramey misidentifying the debris would be
completely innocent since the equipment was indistinguishable
from Mogul equipment and of insufficient quantity to indicate it
might be something else other than a common weather balloon.

Weaver similarly describes there being only a singular radar
target for Ramey to identify, and cites the Dallas FBI telegram
as supporting evidence (p. 22, the introduction to section "WHAT
THE 'ROSWELL INCIDENT' WAS"):

"As previously discussed, what was originally reported to have
been recovered was a balloon of some sort, usually described as
a "weather balloon," although **the majority of the wreckage
that was ultimately displayed** by General Ramey and Major
Marcel [note deliberate omission of any mention of Brig. Gen.
Dubose, a high-level, supporting military eyewitness for
Marcel's account] in the famous photos in Fort Worth was that of
**_A_ radar target normally suspended from balloons [more Mogul
spin by Weaver, since a single target was normally suspended
from a larger, singular meteorological balloon]. "Additionally,
the description of the 'flying disc' was consistent with a
document routinely used by most pro-UFO writers to indicate a
conspiracy in progress--the telegram from the Dallas FBI office
of July 8, 1947. This document quoted _in_part_ [Weaver omits
part where Wright Field disagrees] states '" The disc is
hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a balloon by a cable"
the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon and
radar reflector "disc and balloon being transported"'"

Throughout this, Weaver tries to have it both ways. What was
found was supposedly the super-secret, supersenstive,
multi-balloon, multi target Mogul. Yet he simultaneously tries
to portray Ramey as an innocent, the weather balloon story
understandable, and the incident as vastly overblown. There was
very little debris, all consistent with a singular balloon and
target, as shown in the photos, and as described in the FBI
telegram and Sheridan Cavitt's testimony (p. 24: "He thought at
the time, and continued to do so today, that what he found was
_a weather balloon_" [He] also reviewed the famous Ramey/Marcel
photographs " and he identified the materials depicted in the
photos as _consistent with the materials that he recovered from
the ranch_").

Furthermore, the material was "not readily recognizable as
anything special (only the purpose was special) and the
recovered debris itself was unclassified." The whole thing was a
"non-event." (p. 27)

Now answer me this? Name one single thing in that non-special,
non-classified displayed debris (which Weaver repeatedly
suggests was all there was and indistinguishable from ordinary
weather equipment) that somehow revealed its "special purpose,"
thus clearly linking it to Mogul and required yet another
special shipment to Wright Field for still further
identification after Newton had already officially identified it
and Ramey announced the special flight was no longer needed.

And why was the Dallas FBI informed by Ramey's intelligence
officer (Major Kirton) that Wright Field disagreed with the
description of the debris as arising from a radar target
suspended from a balloon and they were thus shipping the debris
on to Wright Field. This is the same Major Kirton who almost
simultaneously told the Dallas Morning News that the
identification was final, the special flight was cancelled, and
they were probably going to throw the debris in the trash.

In other words, what was so different about this balloon? Why
wasn't this just an ordinary Rawin target and weather balloon
combo on display that could have arisen from any number of
weather stations, as Newton stated back then and now? Why the
additional level of ID (though apparently not by Col. Duffy).

And why, if it was truly Weaver's "non-event, was there the need
for the additional, _widespread_, "concentrated campaign" of
debunkery by the military in succeeding days? In particular, why
the multiple radar target demonstrations all over the country
where they were clearly equating the targets to the widely
reported flying disks?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                 'Debunker' Takes Aim at Cydonian Imperative

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 21:21:19 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:13:15 -0500
Subject: 'Debunker' Takes Aim at Cydonian Imperative


The Cydonian Imperative
1-15-01

'Debunker' Takes Aim at Cydonian Imperative
by Mac Tonnies

A site dealing with controversial evidence of extraterrestrial
intelligence is bound to get feedback. Most of the email I
receive is cautiously skeptical or helpful in tracking down
additional unusual Martian surface features. However, this
latest offering from an anonymous reader accurately sums up the
attitude reflected by NASA and most "mainstream" scientists who
haven't availed themselves of the Cydonia enigma (yet remain
self-appointed "gatekeepers," effectively censoring open
dialogue among reseachers).

http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html (page 26)

(I've added an internal search engine to The Cydonian
Imperative. Hopefully this will help readers wanting to locate
specific references.)


--Mac










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:51:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Actually, the special flight was already ordered and I think one
 >>of the compelling reasons was to get Marcel the hell out of
 >>Roswell. And, contrary to what Tom wrote, I think the rawin and
 >>balloon came from Roswell. Robert Porter, who went to Fort Worth
 >>on the flight with Marcel described materials being handed up,
 >>into the cockpit that sound suspiciously like the radar
 >>reflector and the balloon envelop. Porter mentioned a package
 >>wrapped in brown paper that was triangular, about three or four
 >>feet on a side. This sounds just like a folded up rawin
 >>target... which also accounts for the brown paper on Ramey's
 >>floor that is visible in the photographs.

 >>Porter also talked of a couple of wrapped boxes that were very
 >>light weight, which could have contained the balloon envelop.
 >>So, I believe that we have compelling evidence that the balloon
 >>and target were brought from Roswell, we have compelling
 >>evidence to suggest that such material would be available in
 >>Roswell based on their participation in the Pacific atomic
 >>tests, and, if Ramey ordered the material from Roswell to show
 >reporters, we have fairly compelling evidence of a coordinated
 >>effort.

Good Morning Bruce, List, All -

 >If I may, I'd like to question part of your theory.

 >You assert that Roswell AAFB would have Rawins - implying that
 >they would be familiar with the device and its uses. In July
 >1947, Roswell did not have any ground-based radars. Indeed, in
 >order to practice radar counter-measures, the 509th had to beg
 >time from either the White Sands or Alamogordo radars.

I'm not sure this is quite right. They did request the use of
ground-based radars at other facilities, but that seemed to be
for the diversification of their practice bombing runs rather
than a lack of ground-based radars at RAAF. There were several
types of mobile radars and some of those assigned to the base in
1947 have suggested that such radars were in place. I have found
documentation that places ground-based radars at Roswell in the
late summer of 1947 and there were radar technicians assigned to
the base throughout 1947. This search continues.

 >Given this, it is highly unlikely that anyone at RAAFB would require
 >the use of a Rawin, let alone have one laying around. Besides,
 >Rawins would not be of any use to a bomber wing- their primary
 >military use is for artillery units.

Ah, but I think you missed my point which was they were also
used in atomic testing such as Operation Crossroads, which the
509th and the 1st ATU participated in. The 1st ATU supplied the
logistical support which means that the materials were staged
and flown out of Roswell and in those equipment packages would
have been weather balloons and Rawin targets. All equipment that
was not used was eventually returned to Roswell, so in this
case, it can be suggested that the balloons and targets could be
found in Roswell.

 >There may have been personnel in the 509th that had seen and/or
 >used a Rawin during WWII (like Newton). It is also possible
 >that there were people there who may have seen one during post-
 >war training, although it is quite unlikely that no one in the
 >509th actually handled one then. Brazel's interview makes it
 >quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >not available at the RAFFB.

If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.
And we have a farmer in Circleville, Ohio, who found a weather
balloon and Rawin target, a man who certainly never seen one
before and who was easily able to identify it for what it was.
The weather balloon and Rawin targets were not so extraordinary
that they defied identification by those who had not seen those
specific items.

 >Regardless, it is very obvious that Rawins were not in use at
 >Roswell in '47, and it is unlikely in-the-extreme that one
would >be available at the base to use as a 'substitution'.

I would have to disagree given the fact that base personnel
participated in the atomic testing, and given the fact that
winds aloft data were regularly gathered at Roswell. How do you
suppose they gathered that data if they had neither radar nor
weather balloons and Rawins?

 >I am, however, pleased to see that you now assert the material
 >transported to Ft Worth by Marcel was indeed a Rawin/Neoprene
 >balloon, and that what is in Bond's photos is the same
material. >Procter's story is 'compelling' evidence.

 >So- if the material transported to Ft Worth was a Rawin and
 >Balloon, then there is only _one_ place where these could have
 >be found in the Roswell area- Foster's ranch.

But that wasn't the only place for them to be found. I believe
the assumption here is invalid for the reasons mentioned above.

 >>But remember, Colonel Dubose said that the material displayed on
 >>General Ramey's floor was a weather balloon cover story designed
 >>to get the reporters off their backs.

 >Shandara got quite a different story from DuBose.

Yes, Shandera alone got quite a different story from DuBose.
Everyone else who talked to him learned the same things we did.
Those include Billy Cox at Florida Today who commented on this
aspect of the controversy, Don Ecker at UFO magazine (US), and
even Kris Palmer from Unsolved Mysteries. Our interview (the one
conducted by Don Schmitt and Stan Friedman) is on video tape and
in the FUFOR archives and held at CUFOS, while Shandera's
interview is based solely on his notes with no independent
corroboration. Which version should we accept as closer to the
factual? That which can be independently verified or that which
is based only the memories of a man who had a rooting interest
in one specific aspect of the case? According to Shandera, he
did not record the interview, he just took notes.

 >>And remember that Jesse
 >>Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
 >>told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
 >>recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
 >>to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

 >That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >Jessies's first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

Actually, I don't think it does. While Marcel might have told
Moore that, I don't believe he said it to Pratt. Moore has
offered various versions of his transcripts as evidence, but he
seems to change them as the situation changes so I'm not
convinced that anything we find in them is accurate.

I think there may have been some pictures taken in Roswell with
the real debris but I have never found them and I know of no one
who has ever seen them. On the other hand, when Marcel was shown
the pictures taken by Dr. Johnson in Fort Worth, he told
reporter Johnny Mann that those photographs showed the weather
balloon. He didn't seen to hesitate in that identification.

This part of the story has become quite confused by those who
had agendas to push. Moore has changed portions of his
transcripts to suit his purposes. Shandera has offered an
alternative story but can provide neither tapes nor
documentation to substantiate his claims. Dr. Johnson has
radically altered what he has said, attempting to convince us
all that there was real debris in General Ramey's office. There
are reasons to believe that weather balloons and Rawins were
available at the RAAF in 1947. We just have to sort through the
half- truths, lies, confabulations and mistatements, which can
be a difficult thing to do.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:55:26 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:57:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

Neil Morris wrote:

 >In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >involved

Although I have tried to be polite, there are some things that
just annoy the hell out of me and this is one of them. Please
remember that I hadn't named any of the members of RPIT to whom
I had sent tapes. Neil volunteered this information himself and
then suggested that we, meaning Dr. Johnson and I, should
attempt to settle this matter. Oh, I have tried, for more than
ten years, ever since Dr. Johnson decided that he had seen the
real debris and that General Ramey didn't know what he had when
Dr. Johnson arrived at the office.

For those of you tired of this debate, please punch out now. For
the rest of you, I pose a single question to Neil. Having heard
my tapes, having seen the correspondence between Dr. Johnson and
me, just where have I misrepresented anything in this long and
rather tiresome debate?

Dr. Johnson alleges that I called him cold, giving neither the
time to prepare for the interview nor the opportunity to refresh
his memory concerning the events of July, 1947. I sent to Neil,
as I have to the others who asked, a letter from Betsy Hudon at
UTA who first told me that someone else had just been in contact
with their archives,  looking up the same photographs that
interested me. I asked for the name but she refused, feeling it
would violate a confidence. She did say that she would forward a
letter from me, to this party (I didn't know it was Dr. Johnson
at that time) and give him the opportunity to call me, if he
wished to initiate contact. I sent the letter that explained my
interest and Dr. Johnson called me, leaving a message on my
answering machine.

During that first conversation, you also hear us discussing his
contact with the archives and his telephone conversation with
Betsy Hudon. So much for his allegation I called him cold.

He said that I recorded the call without his permission.
Overlooking the fact that Iowa is a one party state, which means
that only one of those engaged in the conversation needs to know
it is being recorded, you hear me, during the second interview,
ask if it is all right to record. Dr. Johnson gives his
permission.

The first conversation (it really doesn't quite qualify as an
interview) outlines some of the preliminaries. During that
conversation, Dr. Johnson reads from the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram article that he claims, in that same conversation,
to have authored. Again, this proves that I did not call him
cold, that he had had no opportunity to refresh his memory, or
that I had fed him information.

During that conversation, he told me that Ramey had told him it
was a weather balloon and that he had taken just two
photographs. (Here is a point in which Neil wins something...
Dr. Johnson remembered just two photographs, but conceded that
the Marcel photograph looked as if he, Dr. Johnson, had taken
it. I think we all agree that Dr. Johnson took six photographs
and I don't hold it against him that his memory failed on this
point.)

In the second interview, I had had the time to consider what had
been said earlier and had a better handle on the events in Fort
Worth. I asked Dr. Johnson to tell me what had happened and we
have a long narrative by him in which he describes all these
events. In the course of this narrative, without question or
comment by me, you hear Dr. Johnson say, "I posed General Ramey
with this debris. At that time I was briefed on the idea that it
was not a flying disk as first reported but in fact was a
weather balloon that had crashed." His words, on tape, with no
prompting from me.

In the third interview, after he has radically altered his
story, and accused me of misquoting him, I called to see if we
could get to the bottom of this. This is the interview in which
he accuses me of putting words in his mouth. In reality, I am
reading to him from the transcripts of our first interviews,
asking what I got wrong and why he changed his story. His
answers become confused and rambling. At the end, he asks me to
send the specific quotes, not the whole tapes, so I edited out
much of the other material, providing him with what he wanted.
Now he accuses me of editing the tapes for some nefarious
purpose.

I will point out that I sent him letters and asked questions. I
tried to get him to understand that I had quoted him accurately
and the best he could do was show that I had left a word out of
one quote at one point... which he wouldn't have known if I
hadn't sent him the tapes.

He has decided that he photographed real debris from a crashed
flying saucer, all in the face of other testimony that suggests
there was nothing in General Ramey's office when Johnson entered
other than a weather balloon and rawin target. It is clear from
the statements made by General DuBose, Major Marcel and WO
Newton that the debris was a weather balloon. The evidence is in
the photographs for all to see. Clearly this is a weather
balloon and rawin target and nothing else... which might explain
the RPIT desire to cling to Dr. Johnson's discredited testimony
about what was in General Ramey's office. Without it, we are
left with only a weather balloon and degraded target. The
silence from those in the RPIT who had heard the tapes, who have
copies of the tapes, and who had spoken to Dr. Johnson is
deafening. I think they believed what Dr. Johnson said about me
and the recordings... until they heard them for themselves and
realized that Dr. Johnson's take on the situation just wasn't
reflected in reality.

My point here is that Neil has the tapes, has the letters and
has other supporting documentation. Rather than deal with it, he
ignores it, suggesting that Dr. Johnson and I work out the
differences. I have tried and hoped that those on the RPIT who
should have more influence with Dr. Johnson could get some of
the answers. The question that remains is why have they been so
quiet on this point? Why won't they admit 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:24:52 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:59:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Oberg


 >Date: 16 Jan 2002 17:58:23 -0800
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg

<snip>

 >First you cover up the truth of Marciagate. Then you refuse to
 >follow simple rules. You are a bad man!

I trust you have all had sufficient chuckles over this, and it's
justified. I stand (or sit, actually) rebuked.

Regarding 'truth of Marciagate', from what I know of the
controversry, the only untrue allegations concerning Marcia
Smith have been posted by Grant Cameron, not me.


Jim Oberg










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                       Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:27:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:08:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Ledger


 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:06:43 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
 >>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

<snip>

 >>Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exist for that
 >>time period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in?
 >>I haven't been able to find anything for that day or the
 >>few days before or after. Larry hatch might have
 >>something in his *U* base.

 >Hello Don:

 >If somebody will give specific dates and general location, I can
 >look up whatever records I have and summarize those. A place
 >name like "Kinross" is sometimes changed here to match the
 >actual location of the incident, or to give a landmark closer to
 >the events if over large bodies of water.



Hi Larry,

Re: the F89-C out of Kinross AFB.
Date: November 23,1953
Time: Night
Location of Incident: Scrambled to Soo Locks. Merged with object 70
miles over Lake Michigan off Keweenaw Point in upper Michigan.
Additional information: The F89-C was based at Detachment #1 of the
433rd Fighter-Interceptor Squadron at Kinross AFB-Michigan. Case
declassified Dec.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                   Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:20:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:20:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Velez


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 18:02:34 -0600

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:06:53 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg

 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:32:14 -0600

 >>>>From: Moderator UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>>To:  James Oberg
 >>>>From: Errol Bruce-Knapp
 >>>>Date: January 16th, 2002

 >>>>James,

 >>>>Why, despite having been sent a copy - or two - of the UFO
 >>>>UpDates Posting Rules, do you persist in submitting posts for
 >>>>the UFO UFO UpDates List that ignore the rules?

 >>Hello Alfred,

 >>>OK - this time you go too far! This is Oberg bashing, pure and
 >>>simple! Moreover, I'll bet this is a selective application of
 >>>your authoritarian so-called rules, and that you'd let that
 >>>coffee-bush-banging Juan Valdez prance around in UpDates with
 >>>line lengths reminiscent of the epics of Homer! Shame!

 >>See, you go and make fun of my grammatical handicap (in public)
 >>and you smother it in a cheesy racial slur, but if I say
 >>anything about the pink, lacy Victoria's Secret underwear all
 >>you poets are expected wear by the writers guild, then suddenly
 >>_I'm_ the bad guy!

 >Hey! In the first place the underwear's in the by-laws! In the
 >second place I resent being accused of making racial slurs, you
 >siesta taking, taco bending, re-fried beaner! (...to which you
 >reply, "Hey! Who's re-fried?") <g>.

<snip>

Hola Lehmberg,

You wrote:

 >P.S. Seriously though? I love it when Oberg comes up on my
 >spell checker and I get to hit the ignore button!  <g>.

This venue, UFO UpDates, affords us the opportunity to actually
go head to head with one of these well known establishment. You
know me for many years now Alfred, the word 'enemy' is not a
part of my vocabulary. But if I was ever forced to apply it to
anyone, it would be to several of these 'enemies' of democracy,
free-thinking and Truth.

Oberg has participated on this List for about two months now and
has been caught out as many times. I never take joy in the
manifestations of another's character disorder, but in this case
it causes me to rejoice every time one of these people gets
busted in public.

The down/flip-side is - as I mentioned in an earlier post, that
each time busting a 'second string' former NASA spokesman like
Oberg - what little trust people may have left in their own
institutions is diminished even further. Just when you think
they can't possibly sink any lower an 'Oberg' (or some
fanatical CSICOP robot) comes along and manages to drain a
little more water out of the pond.

More than the economics of it, that same lack of the people's
trust in its own institutions is what finally brought Russia
down. That's what I mean by 'enemy' of Truth and of the People
when it is applied here in this instance.

Using words like "enemy" is not something I do lightly or
easily. Unless it "walks and talks like a duck."  These termites
with their cover-ups and lies gnaw away at the very foundations
of democracy. All Americans owe a life_and_death debt to the
many who _gave_their_lives_ defending our freedoms. No matter
what form these threats may assume. I'm just glad that UpDates
is around to afford us the chance to expose these cells to
scrutiny and encourage them to seek professional treatment for
their destructive anti-social behavioral disorder.

"In the purity and essence of our precious bodily fluids," I
remain,

Col. John (Ripper) Velez  ;)
Speaking strictly for myself










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

               Bizarre Creature in Idaho Raises Prospects for

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:39:18 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:23:04 -0500
Subject: Bizarre Creature in Idaho Raises Prospects for


Hi everyone.

For those of you who haven't seen this story, here is yet
another new and unexpected "alien-like" life form discovered
deep inside our own planet Earth - no, they are not related to
the Nazis and travel in flying saucers when then come to the
surface - which raises the hope that similar life forms may also
exist on Mars.

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/life_methane_020116.html


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 17

                       Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:08:56 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:34:21 -0500
Subject: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'


Abduction In My Life
by
Bruce Maccabee


Hi All,

 From the Prologue I became deeply impressed with how accurately
Bruce managed to convey/portray, what its like for someone who
has experienced 'missing time' in connection with an
uncomfortably close-up UFO/occupant encounter - an abduction. He
weaves into the story many of the details that are associated
with the experience of UFO/abduction. His 'case study' is so
faithful and is so deadly spot-on in the telling, that for most
of the book I wondered to myself if Bruce himself is an
abductee? How else could he know so many of the nuances of human
psychology and response as it relates to those who have actually
had to live through such a life altering experience(s).

Something else happens too while you're absorbing this riveting
tale of UFO abduction... you get an education! I thought his FBI
X-Files book was most informative, but 'Abduction In My Life'
walks you step by step in the most unobtrusive and palatable way
through the history/roots of modern ufology while slowly
building an air-tight case for the reality of the UFO
phenomenon. And all based on solid historical fact and
documentation.

As an abductee, I was touched and deeply impressed. As a
ufologist I revelled in all the knowledge I gleaned. As a reader
I was thoroughly entertained from cover-to-cover.

I not only recommend it to all Listerions, but I consider it a
must read for all experiencers of the phenomenon. UFO abduction
is not a nebulous or questionable concept for me. It is a
living, breathing reality that I must learn - am forced - to
live with for the rest of my life. For those who aren't quite
sure if they are abductees or not - self-perceived - and whose
cases have not ever been properly investigated, 'Abduction In My
Life' is a terrific yardstick to use to compare the details of
your recollections and experiences with what is a 'typical',
almost generic, and an accurate model of a UFO/occupant
encounter.

You'll know soon enough if your own experiences either fit the
patterns of _commonly_ reported details or not. I have always
said that a good definition of what comprises a UFO/abduction
case has been sorely lacking. More so than either Budd Hopkins
or David Jacobs, Bruce Maccabee has captured, and faithfully
portrays, what really goes down, and what it's like for both the
experiencer and a researcher during the investigation of one of
these world-view shattering encounters.

Quick personal note:

There is never anything 'iffy' about a close-up UFO encounter or
contact for the victim/witness. It leaves you and your life
permanently altered. It erases all doubt forever. I question the
motives of these beings, whoever they are, and not my
perceptions of them.

I'm not alone either. Many abductees have sacrificed and worked
long and hard to get the larger community to give us a fair
hearing and the kind of serious investigation that our reports
demand. Debbie Jordon-Kauble, Katharina Wilson, Travis Walton,
and many, many others are to be commended for their courage and
dedicated hard work. That those beings and their star-cars are
real, or that they have _intrusively_ entered my own life is not
a question for me. Contrary to the static noise introduced by
those whose 'experiences' have been nebulous enough to cause
them to question their so-called 'perceptions', there are those
of us who _know_ and are _sure_ of what has happened to us.

My highest praise to Bruce for a job very well done, and a tip
of the old Hatlo Hat for an engaging and terrific yarn.  Perfect
for indoor winter activities that involve books, comfy chairs,
and warm beverages.   :)


Satisfied customer - Read the book!

Regards,

John Velez
Webmaster, Abduction Information Center

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/aic/default.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                            Paradigm Clock Re-Set

From: Stephen Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:58:11 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 06:44:18 -0500
Subject: Paradigm Clock Re-Set


PRG
Paradigm Research Group

Press Release
January 16, 2002


Washington, DC - The Paradigm Clock has been reset to 11:58:00
pm (two minutes to midnight). Based upon recent developments
shown below, the clock has been moved back a net 1 minute. An
expanded explanation can be found at:

www.paradigmclock.com/chronicleexplanations.html.

9/11/01 - The United States is attacked by terrorist squads
working on behalf of foreign organizations (< 2 minutes)

9/11/01 to 1/16/02 - The United States undergoes a significant
transformation which extends to domestic and foreign posture as
well as public demeanor. (> 1 minute)

The Paradigm Clock was last reset on May 17, 2001, eight days
after the Disclosure Project [www.disclosureproject.org] held 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.

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
extraterrestrial presence has taken place.

Clock History

April 30, 1998: Published to the internet, 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 pm
May 17, 2001: Time reset forward to 11:59:00 pm

The Paradigm Research Group is a lobbying/consulting project
serving the interests of UFO/ET research/activist organizations
around the country. It is dedicated to ending the government
imposed embargo of the truth of an extraterrestrial presence and
the convening of open, comprehensive congressional hearings to
take the testimony of government witnesses as regards UFO/ET
events and evidence.

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
              Bethesda, Maryland 20814
___________________________________________________

     "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
         if you are willing to give away the credit."
___________________________________________________

           "Intellectual passion is found at the
           intersection of fact and implication"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:26:36 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 06:50:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch


 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:27:04 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:06:43 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
 >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 ><snip>

 >>>Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exist for that
 >>>time period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in?
 >>>I haven't been able to find anything for that day or the
 >>>few days before or after. Larry hatch might have
 >>>something in his *U* base.

 >>Hello Don:

 >>If somebody will give specific dates and general location, I can
 >>look up whatever records I have and summarize those. A place
 >>name like "Kinross" is sometimes changed here to match the
 >>actual location of the incident, or to give a landmark closer to
 >>the events if over large bodies of water.

 >Hi Larry,

 >Re: the F89-C out of Kinross AFB.
 >Date: November 23,1953
 >Time: Night
 >Location of Incident: Scrambled to Soo Locks. Merged with object 70
 >miles over Lake Michigan off Keweenaw Point in upper Michigan.
 >Additional information: The F89-C was based at Detachment #1 of the
 >433rd Fighter-Interceptor Squadron at Kinross AFB-Michigan. Case
 >declassified Dec.



Hello Don:

That rings all sorts of bells now! Keweenaw Point and the date
will make it easy to look up.

I'm late for work now, but will scratch around and get back to
you in about 10 hours, sometime Friday early AM hours.

Best

- Larry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:47:29 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:03:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

Kevin,

Just read your reply to Neil. We are not in any way relying on
Bond's testimony to make our case. We only have the photographs
as evidence and I think what we've found is convincing if you'll
only take another look. Why don't you humor an old man and open
the Bettemann image from the AA CDs and then send me your phone
number and I'll call back and we can walk through it together.

That's the only way to settle this. I'll point out my concerns
and you can try to show me why this is Rawin debris. I think
you'll be surprised when you view this high resolution scan.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                       UFO & Strange Creature In Chile

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:42:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:07:41 -0500
Subject: UFO & Strange Creature In Chile


Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
Miami UFO Center
ufomiami@prodigy.net
1-17-2

UFO And A Strange Creature Appear In Villa San Rafael, Chile


A group of teenagers between 13 and 16 years of age, all
residents of Villa San Rafael, witnessed of a UFO that traveled
at great speeds towards the sector of San Pedro de Atacama and
with a direction from north to south. Mr. Carlos C, of 45 years
of age, who at the time was standing by the front door of his
house on Gabriela Mistral Street, in the southern sector of
Calama, corroborated the sighting.

According to Don Carlos, the UFO was oval in shape and it
emitted an intense white light that made it appear 4 to 5 times
greater in size than the public lighting system fixtures. "It
came descending at a great speed and I noticed an inclination of
about 30 degrees in relation with the horizon. This lasted not
more than 7 seconds; shortly afterwards, I lost it after it went
behind the construction sites," he said.

Furthermore, the young teenagers described how the object
changed in color several times; first they noticed that it was
fluorescent-green and later electric-blue in color. They
absolutely discard the possibility that it was a meteor.
Although it was fast, it was too low in altitude; additionally,
its size and brightness did not fit the typical description of a
meteor.



"An Encounter With A Creature Guaranteed To Send Chills Down
Your Spine!"

Two of the young teenagers, Jean F. and Nelson C, who are
residents of one of the parcels of the central area of Villa San
Rafael, described a chilling experience that they went through
last Saturday, 12 of January of this year (2002) at
approximately 11:45 PM.

It all began when Jean noticed that his pet snake escaped from
its cage. His friend Nelson noticed it was gone, so they began
looking for it outside among the rubble of the parcel.  They
recall how half an hour before, their two dogs strangely began
to howl and cry; however, it did not seem to be important at
that point in time.

They searched for the pet snake together when suddenly, at about
30 meters from where they stood, they saw what appeared to be a
stray dog. They immediately picked up rocks to throw at it to
avoid an attack. However, to their surprise, the animal stood
there, motionless and fearless; it did not get scared nor it ran
away as ordinary dogs normally do. Shortly afterwards, the
strange animal began to move towards them. The movements it made
as it walked were very strange. It used two legs at a time. It
made very small and short leaps like a rabbit. Suddenly, it
stopped and it stood up on two legs. The teenagers shortly began
to feel some kind of energy. "It was like an electrical shock in
the stomach," they said. It later walked again (upright) making
a loud dragging noise, making small leaps and only moving one of
its legs. They thought that it might have been hurt after they
threw rocks at it. They noticed the weird shape of the animal.
"It was like a rugby football with legs," one of them said.

Jean began to feel frightened and started to move away from the
animal. On the other hand, Nelson felt a strange need to get
closer to creature; he got as close as 2 meters away from it.
The animal appeared to emit a strange luminosity that
apparently, was bright enough to light a small area around the
animal in spite of the nighttime darkness of the place.

Nelson was mesmerized as he stared at such strange-looking
animal. He remembers a detailed description of it. According to
him, its head was like the one of a large dog and it had a flat
nose like a bulldog. Its eyes were slanted and pale-red in
color, which could only be seen when the creature turned its
head from side to side like small lizards do. At that moment,
Nelson claims that he heard a voice in his head saying, "don't
stare, just run away."

They provided further descriptions of the alleged animal. Its
ears were flat, round and large. Its arms were short, they had
elbows and the hands had three fingers. It had hair like the one
on a wild pig. Its legs were like the ones from a goat. The feet
had also three fingers and a membrane like ducks, but somewhat
shorter. He does not recall seeing nails because the grass was
covering the tip of the fingers.

On its curved back, they were able to notice a spinal section
covered with amounts of even thicker hair. According to the
teenagers, the "thicker" hairs grew in small separated sections
or groups down the spinal area and they pointed downwards. Most
of the hair of the animal was gray, but the tail had a white
tip. The tail appeared to be three times ticker than the one on
a dog but it was very short; it was about 5 centimeters in
length.


Nelson finally fled terrified form the area. He also described
how he felt an inexplicable bone-chilling cold sensation.
Finally, the teens returned home and did not want to go back to
take a second look at the creature. These testimonies were taken
separately from the teenagers, and yet, both accounts concurred
entirely.


Jaime Ferrer R.

Calama UFO Center

Note: The last names of the eyewitnesses are not being revealed
in order to protect their privacy.

On another note, we just received word that some of Jaime
Ferrer's work is mentioned in the book 'Mothman and Other
Curious Encounters' by criptozoologist Loren Coleman.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                          Secrecy News -- 01/17/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 12:34:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:10:28 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/17/02



SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 7
January 17, 2002


**      PUBLIC FAVORS SECURITY, QUESTIONS SECRECY
**      GENEALOGY OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION CONSPIRACY THEORY
**      RUMSFELD: LEAKS IMPEDED BIN LADEN MANHUNT
**      INTELLIGENCE ISSUES FOR CONGRESS
**      EXCEPTIONS TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT


PUBLIC FAVORS SECURITY, QUESTIONS SECRECY

The American public strongly supports most aspects of government
security policy, such as rigorous background investigations for
persons holding security clearances for access to classified
information.

At the same time, however, "the public believes that far too
much information is being classified," according to a newly
released survey commissioned by the Department of Defense
Personnel Security Research Center (PERSEREC).

The survey is based on polling data collected in 2000 by the
National Opinion Research Center and is broadly consistent with
the results of similar surveys conducted at two year intervals
since 1994.  A report on the latest survey, dated October 2001,
was released yesterday.

"The people who were questioned in the surveys were not part of
the security world," noted PERSEREC director James A Riedel.
"For this very reason, their 'outsider' opinions were
welcome.... Ultimately it would be impossible in a democracy to
maintain a security system without the support of the general
public."

See the new report on "Public Opinion of Selected National
Security Issues, 1994-2000" by Suzanne Wood of PERSEREC here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/pers01.pdf


GENEALOGY OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION CONSPIRACY THEORY

The widespread conspiracy theory that linked the Central
Intelligence Agency to the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy has its roots in a sophisticated Soviet disinformation
campaign, according to an analysis by author Max Holland that is
published in the latest issue of the CIA journal Studies in
Intelligence.

According to Holland, a Soviet-inspired report in an Italian
newspaper tying businessman Clay Shaw to the CIA led New Orleans
district attorney James Garrison to his conclusion that the
Agency was implicated in a cover-up of the Kennedy
assassination.  This view would later be dramatized in Oliver
Stone's movie JFK.

Holland's scholarly detective work makes perhaps the best use to
date of the rich inventory of documents that were declassified
at the direction of the Assassination Records Review Board
(ARRB).

See "The Lie That Linked CIA to the Kennedy Assassination" in
the Fall-Winter 2001 edition of Studies in Intelligence here:

http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/fall_winter_2001/article02.html

Ironically, the CIA initially resisted compliance with the
congressionally-mandated declassification of Kennedy
assassination records, according to the 1998 report of the ARRB.

"The Review Board encountered early CIA resistance to making
records available to the Review Board, as well as resistance to
the ultimate disclosure of records.  A small number of CIA staff
officers, almost exclusively from the Directorate of Operations,
unnecessarily impeded the process and damaged the Agency's
interests by resisting compromise with all-or-nothing
positions," the ARRB stated in its report.

"The fact is," says Holland, "they didn't understand the story
buried in their own documents."


RUMSFELD: LEAKS IMPEDED BIN LADEN MANHUNT

Leaks of classified information are one of the factors that have
impeded the tracking of Osama bin Laden and other wanted
terrorists, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on January
15.

"To the extent people run around and break federal criminal law
and leak and provide classified information publicly, it is very
harmful to what we're trying to do and that has happened," he
said.  See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/dod011502.html

Rumsfeld has denounced unauthorized disclosures of classified
information often since September 11, beginning as early as
September 12.  As a consequence, Assistant Secretary of Defense
Torie Clarke said last week, the number of leaks has "dropped
considerably."  (See SN, 1/11/02).


INTELLIGENCE ISSUES FOR CONGRESS

The assorted intelligence policy issues that confront Congress
in the aftermath of September 11 are reviewed and summarized in
"Intelligence Issues for Congress" by Congressional Research
Service analyst Richard A. Best, Jr., updated January 8:

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/IB10012.pdf


EXCEPTIONS TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT

It is sometimes forgotten that there are numerous conditions and
limitations to the freedoms that are guaranteed by the First
Amendment to the Constitution.  A Congressional Research Service
report entitled "Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the
First Amendment" by CRS analyst Henry Cohen, updated November 5,
2001, provides an instructive account:

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/95-815.pdf


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message: subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 23:29:53 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:13:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gates


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:55:26 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


<snip>

 >Neil Morris wrote:

 >>In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >>Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >>Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >>involved

Kevin Responded:

 >Although I have tried to be polite, there are some things that
 >just annoy the hell out of me and this is one of them. Please
 >remember that I hadn't named any of the members of RPIT to whom
 >I had sent tapes. Neil volunteered this information himself and
 >then suggested that we, meaning Dr. Johnson and I, should
 >attempt to settle this matter. Oh, I have tried, for more than
 >ten years, ever since Dr. Johnson decided that he had seen the
 >real debris and that General Ramey didn't know what he had when
 >Dr. Johnson arrived at the office.

 >For those of you tired of this debate, please punch out now. For
 >the rest of you, I pose a single question to Neil. Having heard
 >my tapes, having seen the correspondence between Dr. Johnson and
 >me, just where have I misrepresented anything in this long and
 >rather tiresome debate?

<snip>

 >My point here is that Neil has the tapes, has the letters and
 >has other supporting documentation. Rather than deal with it, he
 >ignores it, suggesting that Dr. Johnson and I work out the
 >differences. I have tried and hoped that those on the RPIT who
 >should have more influence with Dr. Johnson could get some of
 >the answers. The question that remains is why have they been so
 >quiet on this point? Why won't they admit the truth?

An excellent point!! With all the evidence including tapes and
letters why can't the people on the RPIT come to the valid
conclusion, i.e. that the story changed and the current telling,
although defended greatly, and apparently well liked by them,
was not the first story told?

I find it interesting that in face of all the documented
evidence, tapes and letters some people apparently don't want to
admit the obvious because the conclusion is something they don't
want to hear, or deal with.

One wonders if this same methodology, if you will, be used when
something doesn't agree with "space ship parts" theory?

Besides changing storys, the next dead horse that seems to get
beaten on and off is "Shandara said... Dubose told him...". As I
recall Shandara's so called interview was not taped or
otherwise. Shandara's statement is only based upon "notes" he
allegedly took at the time. I wouldn't hang my hat on the basis
of notes which can't be independently verified.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 21:26:18 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:16:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies


 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:08:56 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

<snip>

 >From the Prologue I became deeply impressed with how accurately
 >Bruce managed to convey/portray, what its like for someone who
 >has experienced 'missing time' in connection with an
 >uncomfortably close-up UFO/occupant encounter - an abduction. He
 >weaves into the story many of the details that are associated
 >with the experience of UFO/abduction. His 'case study' is so
 >faithful and is so deadly spot-on in the telling, that for most
 >of the book I wondered to myself if Bruce himself is an
 >abductee? How else could he know so many of the nuances of human
 >psychology and response as it relates to those who have actually
 >had to live through such a life altering experience(s).

I heartily agree with John's take on 'Abduction In My Life' - see:

http://mactonnies.com/ufobooks.html

The part of the book I had the most trouble accepting was the
narrator's ignorance of the UFO/abduction phenomenon; even if
you don't have the slightest interest in the subject, it's hard
to avoid in our media-saturated environment. I recall hearing
that the two most-perused subjects on the Web are sex and UFOs,
in that order.

I suppose it's fitting that the narrator is a science fiction
writer; I've been on panels with SF authors (usually better
known than I) and they all seem to be self-appointed experts on
UFOs when the subject comes up (as it invariably does...) I've
found that the vast majority are mainstream SETI advocates,
quick to belittle anything having to do with UFOs. Kevin Randle
is the only exception I know of.


=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                        Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 01:10:25 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:18:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident? - Hatch


 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:27:04 -0400
 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:06:43 -0800
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 >>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:39:05 -0400
 >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Kinross Incident?

 ><snip>

 >>>Re: "I am curious, did any UFO reports exist for that
 >>>time period?" How tight a time frame are you looking in?
 >>>I haven't been able to find anything for that day or the
 >>>few days before or after. Larry hatch might have
 >>>something in his *U* base.

<snip>

 >Hi Larry,

 >Re: the F89-C out of Kinross AFB.
 >Date: November 23,1953
 >Time: Night
 >Location of Incident: Scrambled to Soo Locks. Merged with object 70
 >miles over Lake Michigan off Keweenaw Point in upper Michigan.
 >Additional information: The F89-C was based at Detachment #1 of the
 >433rd Fighter-Interceptor Squadron at Kinross AFB-Michigan. Case
 >declassified Dec.


Hello Don, sorry for the delays.

Keweenaw was the magic word, and the date 23NOV53 came right
in... there is only one sighting in my records for that date,
the so-called Kinross incident.

Here is everything I have for two weeks before and two weeks
after that same date:

#3181: 1953/11/18 0730h 81:27:20W  39:25:0N NAM USA OHI
MARIETTA,OH:BBK#UNK:OBS=ATHA:BRITE RED UFO:
2 JETS CHASE:ORDERED VERY SILENT
Ref# 106 WILKINS,Harold: F.S. ON THE ATTACK   Pg 298

#3182: 1953/11/19 ????h 3:37:00E  44:00:00N WEU FRN GRD
le VIGAN,GARD,FR:MANY OBS:WHISTLE:WHT ORB PLUNGES down:
STOPS:SHOOTS BACK UP:THUNDER heard
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg51

#3183: 1953/11/19 0620h 85:39:40W  30:9:40N NAM USA FLR
PANAMA CITY,FL:VLARGE SCR CIRCLES NAVY ANTI-MINE BASE:
GOES >N:shoots up VFAST
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg51

#3184: 1953/11/19 0720h 28:24:0W  60:35:0N  OCN ATL AIR
300mi SW/ICELAND:RAF B29:LONG CGR >>BY:ROW/PORTHOLES:
FLAMES/REAR:NO NAVgn.LITES
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg50
IN-FLIGHT sighting.

#3185: 1953/11/20 1830h 75:40:0W  41:25:0N  NAM USA PNS
SCRANTON,PA:2 HI-ALT NLTS REVERSE DIRECTION:
JOINED/3+3 AMBER NLTS:see /r137 L.GROSS
Ref# 210 The APRO BULLETIN. Vol.2 Issue #5

#3186: 1953/11/23 1840h 86:30:0W  47:15:0N  NAM USA MCH
70mi E/KEWEENAW Pt,MI:RDRS:F89 JOINS UFO OVR LAKE:
BOTH GONE/no trace:/r173p13
Ref# 98 MISCELLANEOUS BOOKS.  #223

#3187: 1953/11/28 ????h 65:10W  12:00S   SAM BLV BNI
GUAPORE Rvr.,BOLIVIA:SCR OVR RIVER:PIPES:WATER POURS OUT:
6 PSH seen:ALL FLY WHEN OBS SEEN. ( Location vague )
/r113= LORENZEN,J&C: ENCOUNTERS w UFO OCC's Pg 144

#3188: 1953/12/1  ????h 7:48E  48:37N    WEU FRN BRH
STRASBOURG,FR:2 GARDENERS:BRILL.DISK goes BACK+FORTH/SKY:
shoots >>S/VHI-SPEED:/J.GUIEU
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg 56

#3189: 1953/12/3  19:40 73:31:40W  40:40:40N NAM USA NYK
BELMORE,LI,NY:1 OBS:PULSATING ORG OVOID-NLT:SUDDEN
90-TURN:1800mph:VHIGH alt
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg57

#3190: 1953/12/3  2310h 70:5:40W  42:2:0N  NAM USA MSC
NORTH TRURO,MA:JET SCRAMBLED:GND+RDR SHOWS BLIP:
RAPID CHANGES/SPEED+ALT:UFO TYPE UNK
Ref# 137 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1953/Book #3 of 3 Pg58

#3191: 1953/12/7  2130h 76:43:0W  39:05:20N NAM USA MLD
OVR FORT MEADE,MD(PRE-NSA):ROUND-ASHTRAY UFO:
WHIRRING SOUND:ERRATIC MOVES
Ref# 120 GOOD,Timothy: ABOVE TOP SECRET. Pg 280
- - - - -

Pretty slim pickings; not just the numbers but the
quality of sightings as well.   The ash-tray saucer
over Ft.Meade,MD sounds interesting (last case above).

November 1953 was generally slow worldwide, the whole
year was a lull between the great waves of 1952 and
1954.

Best!

- Larry








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                             A Short Real Story

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:57:40 -0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:22:35 -0500
Subject: A Short Real Story


Dear friends.

This material was extract from the book 'Somewhere In Venus -
The Kumaras Story', released by Eust=E1quio Anddr=E9a Patounas. He
is very well known lecturer in Brazil. I think his report will
be interesting to many of you here.

A. J. Gevaerd, editor
Brazilian UFO Magazine

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

Returning to Earth

On May 11, 1951, in a private clinic in the district of
Kalithea, Athens, Greece, 3:45 p.m., I once again saw the light
on this planet. It was not the first time I was born in Greece,
as I had had a previous incarnation there at the time they were
erecting monuments which are nothing but ruins today. I was the
son of farmers but had the gift of making statues.

Once I went to School of Arts to improve my learning skills, but
was rejected for being the child of humble people. I was told I
had better go back to the countryside, where I truly belonged.
Even today I carry along this feeling of rejection, but I also
know that I was the sculptor of some of the statues which are
still standing.

Soon after my birth through a normal though difficult delivery
(I weighed 6 kilos plus!), Dora, my mother, woke up in the
middle of the night and as she looked at the my cradle saw a
beautiful woman wearing a blue robe, with long straight black
hair, who was rocking me and caressing. Thinking it might be one
of the nurses, although improperly dressed, my mother went back
to sleep.

In the morning, when breakfast was served in her room, Dora
asked about the pretty nurse who had been there in the night.
The nurse on duty, who had still not left, told there was no one
else there besides herself and she had come into Dora's room
during the night. But my mother insisted and told what the woman
looked like. The nurse was adamant, though: no one had been in
the room.

After my mother was released, I was brought home. At the time my
family was quite wealthy and we lived in a big house in an
enormous area. My room overlooked a garden and my cradle was
close to one of the windows. One night , my aunt Maria, who
lived with us, woke up and rose from her bed to go to the
bathroom. As she passed our room, she saw the same woman next to
the cradle. She was frightened and asked who she was and what
she was doing there. Silently she was asked to remain silent.
And then the mysterious woman was gone!

Some days after the woman's second apparition, a huge storm fell
in the area where we lived, with strong winds, thunder and
lightning. The window closer to my cradle was shattered, and
pieces of wood and glass fell all over me. But I wasn't even
scratched!

We never knew who the strange woman was, if she came from this
or some other plane, or what she wanted. All I know still is
that all my present life on the earth plane, I have always been
blessed with enormous protection, having escaped physical death
several times and saved as if by a miracle. If there is a
connection I do not know and it would probably not be a good
idea to speculate.

I lived in Greece until June 1954, when my father, then an
executive with a big American multinational company, decided to
come to Brazil to take care of an estate left to him by my
grandfather in Jacare=ED (S=E3o Paulo) and in other cities. During
my three years' life in Athens, I fell in a deep well, then in a
river, and overcame a series of minor accidents, with no major
consequences.

In July 1954, we arrived at Santos' harbor (SP) on an Argentine
liner called "Salta". During the nearly one-month journey, I was
careless one day and fell in the swimming pool, and was saved by
a passenger, a black gentleman who had become fascinated with
me.

In Brazil, we settled on a ranch owned by my father, just off
the town of Itaquaquecetuba (SP). We raised chickens and the
estate was on the banks of Tiet=EA River, which was back then very
clean and full of fish. My parents settled there and I was made
to move to S=E3o Paulo City, the capital, because they had
enrolled me at the "Graded School", an American institution
where only English was spoken and taught.

 >From ages 3 to 8, I only spoke Greek and English, and it was my
father's wish that I graduate in that school. However, back in
those days the diploma issued by Graded School was not
officially recognized in Brazil, and I had to be transferred to
an all Brazilian school. In the beginning, I felt it was rather
difficult to learn the Portuguese language, but soon it was all
very well.

Some years later, my parents moved to the capital and we settled
in the district known as Para=EDso (or Paradise in English), two
blocks from Graded School, which would later be moved out of the
building, being replaced by UCBEU - Uni=E3o Cultural Brasil
Estados Unidos (or Brazil-USA Cultural Union). The language
school is still there today.

So as to keep my command of the English language, I was enrolled
at UCBEU and studied there until I was 14, which has been very
helpful in my life, not professionally speaking, but as a means
to help me communicate with my brothers and sisters from other
countries. One night in 1961, I, almost 10 years of age, left by
the kitchen door (I no longer remember why) and walked to the
adjacent building in the back of our estate.

It was a dark evening, though not very late at night, and I felt
a sort of warmth coming from somewhere above my head. I was
impelled to look up and I saw this truly unforgettable sight: a
round object, with multicolored lights, hovering over our house.
I thought it had the size of a king-size pizza (but I can't tell
to what altitude it hovered, as I was too young for such
estimates) and its lights were blinking off and on.

Thrilled at the sight, I went back in and called my parents to
come and see what I had just seen. We went together to the back
yard and beheld the object, still hovering in the same spot. We
then called out the neighbors, who also saw came outside and
watched. We decided to all come out into the street where we
could catch a better view.

The object seemed to be spinning around its axis and it remained
this way for a long time, until it began to move slowly towards
Ibirapuera Park. As we watched it in awe, the object suddenly
made three of four quick zigzag movements and disappeared like a
flaming arrow in the horizon. At that very moment there were
dozens of witnesses left in wonder and stunned by the phenomenon
they had just seen.

That was, when I was 10 years of age, my first conscious
sighting of an unidentified flying object. >From that day on, I
have not stopped researching the event and I have not forgotten
the feeling that there was something familiar about that. I knew
what a flying saucer was! I can't explain it, but it was a
natural thing to me.

Later on in my adult life I found out that my experience and
encounters with extraterrestrials have begun in previous lives.
In some of them I used to be scared at the presence of beings
who come to me and calm me down, saying there was no need to
fear them. This is a kind of familiar feeling that throbs in my
heart, and an indescribable love for words issued by such
beings, whoever they are.

A few years later, when I was riding a bike with a friend at
Ibirapuera Park in S=E3o Paulo, one late afternoon, we looked up
and saw two disk-shaped objects, similar to two overlaid
saucers, hovering above a statue. As we watched them we made
sure they were not hot air balloons (actually my friend and I
were experts and making that sort of balloon), and my friend was
most distressed and rode away from the scene. Maybe contaminated
by his panic, I freaked out too and fled, and we never knew what
happened next.

In those days I was beginning to ask my dad to cut out news from
newspapers that mentioned extraterrestrials, flying saucers and
things of that nature. I used to watch every movie about it, and
often more than once. A obsession with the space theme was
beginning to overwhelm me, and I still feel to this day.

During my childhood and teenage years I would often dream about
flying saucers and space aliens. But those beings I used to see
in my dreams were exactly like us humans. We would talk at
length about trivialities and I would often ask them about
planets, their origin and customs, the length of space travel,
their society, etc. They were always kind enough to answer to my
queries, but their answers had to fit my level of immature
comprehension. In addition, I used to feel that those dreams
(let's call them so) were interrupted after our conversation, or
in other words, we would talk about lots of things and soon
after I could remember nothing.

When I was 11 or 12 years old, I began to develop an absolute
dread of lizards. It was an unexplainable feeling and I still
don't know whether it had to do with fear or disgust at their
apparently transparent and cold bodies, or something else.
Wherever there was a lizard you were sure to find me several
feet away, and sometimes I would lock myself in the bathroom or
a closet. I made some inquires with my parents and relatives to
check whether sometime during my early childhood that had an
incident involving this little saurian, such as a lizard
dropping onto my boy, some ill prank made by a friend, etc. But
nothing ever seemed to satisfy my curiosity on this matter.

A few years later, when I was 14 or 15 years old, I woke up
dozens of times in the middle of the night to find my pillow
soaked in blood. I do not recall having any dreams involving
abductions or the insertion of an implant at that time, and my
mother used to say that those bleedings were the result too much
sun in the head... However, the phenomenon also occurred on
cloudy and rainy days! It had nothing to do with heatstrokes or
concussions. It happened naturally and, oddly enough, only at
night, usually very late.

I was inexperienced in this area of ufology and I could never
have imagined that some alien being had been poking something
into my nostrils. Until today I have not learnt the true reason
of those bleedings that lasted for so many years. The doctors
never found anything irregular, although a X-ray of the
paranasal was never done or requested. As my nose is big enough,
I believe that if the aliens really did insert something into
it, it have been too costly for them, for the raw material for
implants into my nostrils would be enough for a dozen of
normal-sized nose abductees...

We were Orthodox Greeks and used to go to the church frequented
by the Greek colony in S=E3o Paulo, while at the same time my
parents and tried to open our horizons for a more holistic view
of life. My father, a precocious agronomist engineer (graduated
at age 21) was also interested in the spiritualist doctrines,
cosmology, exobiology and akin sciences. Never did he try to
direct or influence my religious beliefs or professional future.

We had a library that was rich in scientific and spiritualistic
books, as well as in UFOs. My father had met Alberto San Martin,
a Spaniard who had had an encounter with a blonde alien being
and who had been given a rock with strange inscriptions, which
led him to write the book "The Space Rock". I believe that was
the first book I ever read about extraterrestrials. Thrilled
with the story that taken place in Spain, I would save my
monthly allowances to buy books about Ufology and UFOs, which I
read greedily because of my enormous interest in the subject.

And those were my teenage years. Not a very dedicated student (I
was kicked out of every school I every studied at, with no
exception), I never bothered to hide my interest in studying
flying saucers and extraterrestrials, going on hundreds of
night-watches either by myself of with company, cutting out
articles and news from newspapers, asking people if they had
seen something and gathering up incredible testimonies that have
never been published anywhere on this planet.

Every story and fact that I have heard about in my life have
been recorded in my memory and it's safe to say that I they were
ever written or transcribed, they would make hundreds of books.
But that was my journey: whatever I heard was meant for my ears
alone. I might have published them but I would be doing what
others often do - write about other people's stories so that
other people would read. My extraterrestrial friends have
already told me that we can only teach others that which we have
lived. It's no use telling or teaching what you have not
experienced or learnt form personal experience, specially in the
areas of human evolution and transformation.

I soon had collected a vast material on Ufology and pursued my
studies and researches on my own, independently. It was a
private search. I did not use to go to study groups and used to
limit myself to absorbing my self-acquired knowledge. Already in
those early days, orthodoxy, spiritualism, spiritual studies and
exobiology merged within my being. My thirsty for knowledge far
exceeded the dogmas and prejudices. I was a youth in search of
the delicious moments that my age would allow, and I added to my
natural teenage rebellion the frantic search for something that
was rooted deep within my innermost being.

I still can remember if it were today the moment I found out
there was an organization that officially studied Ufology. It
was the APEX  (Associa=E7=E3o de Pesquisas Exol=F3gicas, or
Association for Exologic Research), whose office was in a
spacious and comfortable house in district of Lapa, S=E3o Paulo,
and whose president was Dr. Max Berezowsky, a physician.

With an indescribable feeling of joy I began to frequent their
meetings every Saturday. Dr. Max was a scholar who admitted he
had never had an experience with UFOs or aliens in spite of
several and constant watches, and who also performed experiments
in which he studied plants' sensitivity.

The group member were highly skilled, competent and dignified,
and they used recording cameras, binoculars and were keen on
researching the UFO phenomena. The walls in APEX were filled
with pictures of flying saucers and the cheerful, heated up
meetings were held every Saturday. I don't remember how long the
joy lasted, but financial difficulties drove APEX out of the
estate, which eventually led to its extinction, at least in
terms of associates.

It was through that organization that I attended the Congress
held at Teatro de Cultura Art=EDstica, in S=E3o Paulo, in 1979, when
I had the great honor of meeting and talking to the late General
Uch=F4a and Joseph Allen Hynek, besides other famous and renowned
ufologists, such as Professor Fl=E1vio Augusto Pereira. It was an
unforgettable event and the forerunner of the International
Congress in Bras=EDlia.

 >From that day on I began to keep in touch with other
researchers, exchanging knowledge and experience, but still on a
somewhat reserved level. The frustration about APEX's extinction
affected me badly. Incidents involving UFOs were still present
in my life. On a certain occasion, a strange object followed my
bus for over 2 hours, from Curitiba to S=E3o Paulo. Sitting alone,
I was crying with a terrible toothache.

Trying to keep myself busy, since I couldn't sleep, I started to
observe intently an object in the horizon that seemed to be
following us. It was a reflection from the light inside the bus
nor was it the headlight of a car - I was young but not too
young as to not be able to recognize and tell natural from
artificial or unusual phenomena.

Unable to minimize the excruciating pain I was in, I mentally
talked to the object, saying, "If you are really a flying
saucer, prove it by making my toothache go away." Whether it a
coincidence, mind power, extraterrestrial influence or pure
imagination, my pain was gone, I fell asleep and finished the
trip in a pleasant way.

I spent 34 years as a militant UFO researcher, but in complete
ostracism. I did not write to magazines, newspapers or other
periodicals, and tried to understand, learn and research on my
own. During all my youth I felt an impulse to write. Phrases and
sentences would pop into my head and, hard as I tried to make
sense of it, nothing would occur me until I sat in a quiet place
and began to write those "soundless words". That was how I used
to be told to write something. The first sentence was repeated
over and over, almost driving me nuts, until I began to write.
As soon as I had started the process, the messages would come in
their entirety, and I would feel so overwhelmed with emotions
that sometimes ended up crying and believed that I had written
them down myself. We will elaborate on this in a future chapter.

And this persistence continues today, in a frequent contact with
other orbs or dimensional planes, not when I want it, but when
"they" wish it. Back in those days many of such messages were of
a personal nature, encouraging me in my search and clarifying
issues that lay buried in my mind. Whenever I asked something,
there was no answer. The answer would only come much later, in
due time and according to my level of comprehension. The more
anxious I got, the fewer communications I received. Stillness
was necessary so that my soul could learn to listen without the
physical ears, in a ceaseless and necessary work of interior
tuning.

Contacts became more frequent in conscious dreams, telepathic
messages, fact that would be proven later, and that was how an
irreversible process began not only of searching confirmation of
alien presence, but also an inner search where only my personal
experience and learning could provide the answers I sought.

Once I was sleeping and dreamed that a craft flew over my house
and landed on the street. At that time I was tired and already
had my first child, Eduardo. I remember that in the dream, right
after watch the spaceship land, I asked my wife to close the
kitchen door and call the police. When she picked up the phone,
she realized the line was dead. In the meantime, an entity
dressed in silvery garments came in through the kitchen door -
the very same door I had wanted to close. When I saw the
creature coming into my living room, I said to it in English, "I
am not afraid of you". I have no idea why I spoke English in the
dream, as I hadn't practice this language for a quite a long
time.

The entity didn't answer, but stood motionless at the passage
between the kitchen and the living room, and then I noticed that
there was a man sitting in the living room, and when I looked
carefully, I realized there were two women with him. We then
started a conversation in which I asked them where they'd come
from, to which their reply was that they couldn't tell me. I
asked the people got married in their home planet, and they said
yes. They also said that a journey from their planet to Earth
took 4 months and 20 days, but then one of the women corrected,
saying that it actually took 4 hours and 20 minutes. The
contradiction was never really clear to me. A curious fact was
that during a long period in my life I used to wake up every
night at 4:20 =AAm., completely sleepless and not knowing what to
do about it.

I don't remember having my wife taking part in the conversation,
for after trying, unsuccessfully, to call the police, she was
nowhere to be seen. The entity standing by the door was
different from the others, not only because of his clothes but
because he never said a word during the whole encounter. The one
who was answering my questions was a gentleman dressed as an
ordinary Earth man, and the women would sometimes intervene; but
most of the time they remained quietly seated and listening. I
don't know how long we talked and have no recollection of how
this dreamy encounter ended.

When I woke up in the morning, I went to work as usual. Back in
those days I was a manager in a big bank and had as a habit to
call home before leaving work and ask if my wife need anything
(bread, milk, etc.). On that day, I dialed over and over but
nobody answered the phone in my house. That was strange because
we had a little baby and my wife was usually in at that time. I
was very worried when I left the bank, and when I got home, I
asked my wife why she answered. She told the line had been dead
all day, but she didn't call the phone company from somebody
else's telephone because she didn't want to leave the baby
alone. But when I picked it up, to our surprise, it was working
normally! Coincidence? Any connection with the dream? A
confirmation that it hadn't been a dream after all?

I never had a satisfying answer - not that I needed one. Twenty
years later, Budd Hopkins helped me unravel something about what
had happened that night, putting me in conscious regression. The
answers are of a personal nature, unnecessary here, but they
were useful to confirm that what I experienced that night had
not been a dream, but an abduction to a spacecraft, followed by
clinical examinations and recalled free from trauma.

A great many things and facts have occurred throughout all these
years, but are not the scope of this book. In my eternal inner
search I have made lots of things come forth in my memory, and I
try to share this knowledge so that people can find certain
similarities in their own processes. Na old adage says that
"when the water comes up, the well is ready". I want to remind
you that we are all naturally perfect, only we don't stand
perfect at the moment.

Let us now embark upon an adventure of consciousness!

Extract from the book 'Somewhere in Venus - The Kumaras Story' by
Eust=E1quio Anddr=E9a Patounas.

Contact: socex@socex.org.br








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                  Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 05:23:48 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:26:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Lehmberg


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:24:52 -0600

 >>Date: 16 Jan 2002 17:58:23 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg

 ><snip>

 >>First you cover up the truth of Marciagate. Then you refuse to
 >>follow simple rules. You are a bad man!

...noticed the absence of any smiley emoticon thingy...

None dare call it evil... but what is an "evil" but a
complacency, an obfuscation, or a self-serving dodge. What is it
but the convenient retreat of a two color science...

Is it but a busy shill for the obviously outmoded, a strident
excuse for intellectual cowardice, or a passionate appeal for
continued cognitive dissonance regarding anything outside a
lack-wit mainstream's jealously shallow focus? What _is_ evil?

 >I trust you have all had sufficient chuckles over this, and it's
 >justified. I stand (or sit, actually) rebuked.

Now _there's_ a great portrait of "too little too late"... and
this from a guy that feels he's too cool for the room...

 >Regarding 'truth of Marciagate', from what I know of the
 >controversry, the only untrue allegations concerning Marcia
 >Smith have been posted by Grant Cameron, not me.

Oh you clever, clever man! But let me remind everyone of a
proposed difference between you and GC... _he_ operates from a
position of genuine concern regarding the thoughtful progression
along an evidentiary path of items winnowed (with great
difficulty) only from what can be gained via the diseased
paradigm of closed institutions _you_ busily shill for! He holds
the higher ethical ground even if he's wrong! _If_ he's _wrong_,
he wrong for the _right_ reasons... and given the opportunity?
He _would_ acquiesce. He _wants_ to be right. He _wants_ to know
the truth. He _wants_ to live in a real world.

His data might _be_ bad, but his data is only bad because _your_
lot makes it well nigh impossible to gather, in the first place!
Say what you want, but he would go where the data goes, while
_you_ on the contentiously egregious other hand... well... why
innumerate the patent obvious?

You suggest (thinly) that GC posts allegations he _knows_ to be
untrue... and if that doesn't just take the pot/kettle/black
cake...

...what _is_ evil but the knowing pot calling the innocent
kettle black?


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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
the decidedly 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                     Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Jonach

From: Kurt Jonach <eWarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:43:06 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:45:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Jonach


 >From: Stephen Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Message-ID: <bb.19a89832.2978a2f3@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:58:11 EST
 >Subject: Paradigm Clock Re-Set

 >Washington, DC - The Paradigm Clock has been reset to 11:58:00
 >pm (two minutes to midnight)
...
 >9/11/01 to 1/16/02 - The United States undergoes a
 >significant transformation which extends to domestic and
 >foreign posture as well as public demeanor. (>1 minute)

Stephen,

According to your assessment, we gained one minute, that is, we
are now closer to ET disclosure than we were last September?

Honestly speaking, I would have said the transformations which
occurred over the last few months moved the clock the other way.

I imagine that a Washington DC political activist, more than
anyone else in the UFO community, knows about the current
Administration's predilection for secrecy.

I would have thought that the Attorney General's new policy, to
resist access to unclassified government documents through the
Freedom of Information Act, hinders UFO research.

An Executive Order issued last November more or less confounds
the Presidential Records Act. It has been suggested that this
exercise of executive priviledge is intended to selectively
conceal documents from prior US administrations.

So, I fail to see how that bodes well for the disclosure of a
presumed 50 years of government secrecy with respect to
extraterrestrial intelligence.

(I don't think you mind taking the input, or I wouldn't have
mentioned it. Assuming there is anything to disclose, I would
have set the clock back.)

-kj








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:02:28 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:52:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:46:11 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:43:14 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>>Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
 >>>some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
 >>>that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

 >>I do not speak alone when I say that you guys are completely out
 >>to lunch on this, particularly your statement that _none_ of the
 >>debris is from a RAWIN radar target.

 >>I can show you photos of the Rawins from that time period with
 >>the identical white paper backing to the aluminum foil wrapped
 >>around the sticks forming a straight white seam, just as you see
 >>in these photos. The sheets of foil paper made up triangles 2' x
 >>2' x 2.8', again evidenced in the photos. The stick lengths and
 >>dimensions are certainly consistent with those used to make the
 >>targets.

 >David,

 >As one of those "out to lunch" who _did_ come out with the
 >statement that _none_ of the debris was that of an ML307 can I
 >here publicly say I could be wrong.

OK, acknowledged. I was responding to Ed Gehrman's statment that
"our" contention (meaning RPIT's) was that literally none of the
debris could be accounted for by an ML307. Unfortunately, below
you are back to claiming that most of the debris cannot be
explained as an ML307.

 >Over the last many weeks one of the RPIT members Andrew Lavoie
a >Canadian Engineering technologist has been using some 3D
 >modelling software at his disposal to model the scene in
 >currently one, of the Fort Worth photographs. With the aid of
 >the software he is now getting size measurements of articles
 >within the image with aprox 2% error. He has a set of material
 >sizes given to him by Prof Charles Moore and taken directly
from >the intact ML307 he still has.

I have been doing the same thing the last few days with a 3D ray
tracer and also have measurements down to a few percent.

First of all, if memory services me, I don't think Moore's
intact ML307 is an original. I think it is a reconstructed model
made by Moore himself. Buyer beware.

Second, Moore is far from infallible on the specs. E.g. he gave
the weight of the ML307 in his AF interview as being only 100
grams, or only a little more than 3 ounces. But the manufacturer
in a 1947 article gave the weight as 12 ounces or around 350
grams. And a simple calculation of weight using reasonable
assumptions about the material areas, thicknesses, volumes, and
densities, also yields net weights in the neighborhood provided
by the manufacturer. It's literally impossible to get the weight
anywhere near 100 grams. The balsa sticks alone weigh more than
that.

Third, the specs changed over the years. So again, don't get too
hung up on one set of dimensions provided by Moore. The
manufacturer may also have changed suppliers now and then and
stock changed. Or maybe one month, the supplier mistakenly sent
stock a little out of spec, and rather than junk it or send it
back, they just made do with what they had on hand. This wasn't
rocket science. They were a toy manufacturer making balsa kites
for the Army.

Unfortunately neither the full specs nor tolerances for the
sticks were specified in the engineering diagram published in
the AF Roswell report, but some variation would be expected.
Therefore I don't understand the extreme conclusion jumping that
"this can't be from a radar target" when the measurements seem
to be only a little bit off from Moore's memory of what the
specs were.

I also don't get too spooked when somebody like Levoie says he
finds a stick that's off by a millimeter or two in thickness
from what Moore specified. That could be a normal variation from
specs or a spec Moore never provided or even a mistake on
Moore's or Levoie's part. I don't immediately conclude that this
must be original Roswell debris and couldn't possibly be from a
standard ML-307 radar target.

 >Here's the interesting bit, _some_ of the measurements clustered
 >on _some_ of the debris _do_ fit within a few percent, but it
 >seems many more _do_not_ and this includes many of the struts,

I'm sorry, but I totally disagree. I would say the vast
majority, not _some_ agree within a few percent in length. Of
course, short pieces don't count, since they could be simply
broken. I cannot find even one overly long piece, and only one
piece which seems unusually thin (along the lower edge of the
brown paper).

 >some are out by 125% and more,

In what? Length, thickness? How many is some? One? A dozen? If
things are too short, so what? Things can be broken into smaller
pieces.

 >also much of the edge tape seen
 >in the pictures does not meet the size specs Prof Moore
 >supplied.

This is a serious mistake. There is no "edge tape. The white
line along the edge of the foil triangles is not "tape." It is
the white paper backing to the foil wrapped around half of the
exterior diagonal struts forming "sheaths" for the sticks with
the white paper side out. This is clearly indicated in the
engineering diagram.

Where any the tape comes in here is specified in a blueprint
detail stating that the foil/foil seam where the wrapped-around
foil paper comes back on itself was not to be glued but held
together with clear acetate tape, an "exotic" material commonly
called in this country by its trade name of Scotch tape.
However, I and others have looked in vain for this tape, and
everybody has come up with a big zero, not surprising, since it
is clear.

The fact that this gross mistake is being made is a big red flag
that there is still an incomplete understanding on your side as
to how these targets were put together. Then apparently based on
this misunderstanding, some of you then jump to the conclusion
that something is way out of spec and further conclude that this
can't be a Rawin target. It must be "real," "anomalous" Roswell
debris.

Now Karl Pflock concluded otherwise but was equally mistaken.
His claim was that the white strip was clearly the Mogul white
tape with "flower patterns." Problem is, again, this isn't white
tape and he likewise doesn't know what he is talking about. And
there sure as hell aren't any flower patterns to be seen, on the
white strips nor anywhere else. The only difference here is that
he twists the exact same misunderstanding of construction into
supposed "supporting evidence" that this must be a radar
reflector from Mogul.

 >So can I now downgrade my statement to " only some of the debris
 >_may_ be from an ML307".

I have yet to see a single thing, not one, that couldn't be part
of an ML-307. The fact that you state "only some" and further
qualify and emphasize "_may_ be" from an ML-307, indicates to me
that you are still well within Ed Gehrman's more extreme
position that "none" is from an ML-307.

And it seems to be based primarily on serious misunderstandings on your part
as to the construction of the radar targets.

I find myself growing increasingly irritated as I watch this
whole debacle, originally started by James Bond Johnson about 3
years ago, unfold. He started out on some personal quest to
prove that he had photographed the "real" Roswell debris. Also,
for something to do with the feelings of Mrs. Ramey, he wanted
to exonerate Ramey of accusations that he had lied about what
happened and substituted a weather balloon for the real debris.
See, it was the real debris all along.

Then he started spinning the story. It seemed to change
practically every week. Unfortunately, he sucked in a lot of
well-meaning people and got them to buy into the snake oil he
was trying to peddle.

Now at first I thought sifting through the debris might be a
worthwhile venture. This was clearly an aluminum foil and balsa
radar target, but maybe something truly unusual got left behind
in the confusion. I was glad that somebody like Neil was willing
to take the time. Maybe something of real significance would
emerge.

But then the investigation went off half-cocked. Instead of one
or two things that might be anomalous, _everything_ became
anomalous.

So here we are in what I and most others consider to be a
complete waste of time, a needless diversion from far more
important issues. The hardcore debunkers are chortling over the
infighting amongst the "saucer buffs" over the patently obvious.
The credibility of everybody ends up suffering as a result.

It's a classic example of looking at the leaves and failing to
see either the forest or the trees.

I am also going to say to Neil, whom I like very much, that he
and others are seriously hurting their credibility with what I
and nearly everybody else considers to be utter nonsense. If you
can't even get this right, why should anybody seriously consider
anything else you might have to say about any other related
matter?

 >I still believe a significant portion of the debris remains
 >unexplained, none of the debris that exhibits anomalies has
 >provided measurements so far that match those of ML307
material.

Well, I respectfully disagree. I, nor anybody else, on the
outside see anything anomalous, much less a significant portion.
What I see are some confused people working off false
assumptions. Unfortunately it didn't burn itself out and instead
kept growing. Now it's an article in the MUFON Journal. The
Rawin was never a Rawin -- it's the real saucer debris. (I'm
sure I hear Dennis Stacy giggling somewhere in the background.)

Enough is enough! It's become embarrassing.

 >>>>>And is there less debris on the floor in the Newton shot than in
 >>>>>the Ramey/Dubose photos?

 >>>>This is an obvious result of the different angles from which the
 >>>>photographs were shot and nothing more.

 >>I agree with Kevin Randle. The Newton photo uses a camera angle
 >>pointed to the left, showing the leftmost side of the brown
 >>paper with debris on top and misses a little bit of the debris
 >>to the right and out of the frame. It also does not show most
 >>of the debris below the paper and closest to the camera. The
 >>Ramey/Dubose photos has the camera further back, pointed more
 >>centrally, showing the complete collection of debris left and
 >>right plus pieces "below" the paper and closest to the camera.
 >>It's just a matter of camera angle.

 >>The larger triangular piece with the stick attached being held
 >>by Col. Dubose while seated in the central chair is now more to
 >>the left and being held in Newton's left hand. Marcel also has
 >>hold of this larger piece with an attached stick. Newton has
 >>grabbed one of the smaller pieces from the left side and is
 >>holding it in his right hand.

 >>Material has been moved around a little bit, but it's just looks
 >>like ordinary posing for pictures.

 >>I agree that a careful inventory would be very useful (in fact,
 >>I am working on this now). So why the wild rhetoric from your
 >>side of the aisle that the debris has been removed in the Newton
 >>photo and thus "sanitized"? I see zero evidence of this. It just
 >>more nonsense about how this obvious radar reflector debris
 >>represents real saucer material.

 >An example of "sanitization", in both Marcel images there is a
 >piece of twisted material seen at Marcel's feet, this is best
 >seen in MarceRight, where it can be spotted starting halfway
 >across the bottom edge of the picture and running up diagonally
 >about 30 degree to the left. The debris on show in both Marcel
 >images approximates to roughly the bottom right quadrant of
 >debris seen in the Newton image. Most of the debris seen around
 >the twisted piece can be spotted in roughly the same position in
 >this part of the Newton image, _but_ not the twisted piece.

The large triangular piece with stick attached held in Newton's
left hand where he is posing to the left of the debris was
previously over more to the right and further back in the Marcel
and Ramey, Ramey/Dubose photos. Newton has laid the edge of the
stick/triangular piece down right where this "twisted piece" was
in the other photos. In other words, it may simply be a case of
it being hidden from view by this large piece previously not in
that position.

But instead you again jump to an unwarranted conclusion that
because the piece can no longer be seen in the one and only one
Newton photo, this necessarily means that it has been
deliberately removed and the scene "sanitized" for Newton's
appearance. I can't emphasize enough how incredibly faulty this
logic is.

 >That
 >piece of debris has a number of anomalies that single it out as
 >none ML307 debris, it's thickness is far greater than any foil
 >used in a radar target so much so that it shows clearly on one
 >end a very neat right angled folded lip, it also has clearly
 >defined raised /stamped markings.

Now, let me explain what it almost certainly really is, why it
has that neat right angle straight fold, and why this is exactly
what you expect to see in an ML-307 if you properly understand
its construction details.

There are nine right-angle triangles making up the three
bottom/outward facing corner reflectors of the ML-307. In
construction these were made up of 4 larger right triangles of
foil/paper and sticks, with stick legs of the right triangle of
length 2'10", a hypotenuse of foil/paper 4' long, and part of
the central framework balsa "spine" in the middle that was 2'
long. (The remaining needed triangle was smaller and 2' x 2' x
2'10".) The bigger triangles looked like this (please make
allowances for drawing this with text characters):

            ^
          / | \        D = Diagonal balsa sticks (9 altogether)
    2'10"/  |  \2'10"  C = Central spine balsa stick (6 altogether)
        /   |   \      Foil/paper wrapped around D sticks (creating
     D /  2'|C   \D    white seams depending on direction of wrap)
      /     |     \
     /      |      \   Foil/paper folded over C stick, forming
    /       |       \  straight rectangular impression of foil.
    -----------------  Paper in contact with stick and glued to it.
       2'       2'
     Foil/Paper edge (glued and taped to 2 other C sticks from other
                      triangular segments)


Now one of these triangular panels with a D stick attached is
clearly visible being held by Dubose, Marcel, and Newton. Two or
three more broken up, less complete ones are laid out on the
floor, and then there are miscellaneous small fragments. That's
what you would expect to see from a model ML-307 radar target
that's been torn up. Most of the main foil/paper panels are
readily accounted for.

Now here's a cross-section of where the foil/paper is wrapped
around the D sticks with the white paper on the outside. That
forms the so-called anomalous straight white seam or Pflock's
"Mogul white flower tape."

    White paper side (outside)
|---------------------------- Foil/paper (Foil on inside)
| |----| |------------
| | D  | |      ----------Clear Scotch acetate tape across
| |    | |                foil to foil seam
| |____| |
|________|
  Paper side (white)


And here's another paper/foil/stick joint where the paper/foil
crosses up and over the central C stick, paper side down, and
is glued to the C stick:
                 |--------|
                 | |----| |
                 | | C  | |
Foil side       | |____| |    Foil side
________________|        |___________________
Paper side                    Paper side

Note that the foil molds itself to the underlying stick shape.
There is a nice right angle bend along a straight edge.

There are several clear examples of this in the Ramey/Dubose
photo (where most of the debris is shown). The triangular panel
near the left edge of the paper has this rectangular foil bend
in the middle with a broken stick still underneath (and with
ends poking out from underneath the foil). You can also see this
rectangular ridge in the middle of the partial triangular panel
directly beneath that.

In the case of the so-called anomalous bent piece, it is clearly
an extension of an rectangular sheath piece just to its right
and still connected to the "anomalous piece" by a small bridge
of foil. It has been separated from the C stick underneath, a
little bit which can be seen underneath just above the foil
bridge. The rest of the stick extends out to the right where its
end can be clearly seen on the rug underneath the long piece
lying on top and laid out diagonally at about a 45 degree angle.

It looks to me like the foil/paper panel has been partially
pulled away from the C stick. The paper, being glued to the
stick, mostly remains behind, though shards of the white paper
can still be seen hanging to the "anomalous piece" on the
bottom.

And that's all it is. The "bareness" of the metal is easily
explained (delamination of the foil paper) as is the right angle
bend (foil molded to the underlying stick). The "symbols" are
probably imaginary, just crinkles in the foil or maybe
impressions left from being molded to the stick earlier. The 1
mm anomalous thickness I suspect is also strictly imaginary,
since you are getting down to the pixel resolution of even the
best of images. E.g., on Stan Friedman's negative scan, which is
4000 pixels across of the Ramey/Dubose photo, each pixel
represents about 1/2 mm in that region. There is just no way to
accurately resolve anything less than a millimeter in thickness.

A very good example of a stick with some foil/paper and paper
still attached lies directly below the "anomalous" metal piece
(a portion of the anomalous piece runs underneath it). The
foil/paper has been wrapped across or around the stick paper
side in, and glued directly to the stick. To the left side, the
foil is seen still attached and molded to the stick (the glued
paper hidden from view underneath), but to the right of this,
the foil has separated from the paper, and shards of white paper
can still be seen glued to the stick.

Delamination of the foil/paper not only explains bare foil or
paper pieces, it probably also explains the so-called anomalous
white "thick pieces," which look like they've been cut out with
a jigsaw. But I think the simple reality of it is, this is just
torn foil/paper (hence the "jigsaw" pattern) that is partially
delaminated. A little gap opens up in between, giving the
illusion of thickness. The rest of the illusion occurs because
the flash is so close to the camera lens, causing very little
shadowing within the gaps. Instead, the spaces between the white
paper on top and the foil below are filled with light, and it
looks like a solid white piece of something with elaborate cuts
in it.

 >This none target piece of debris is nowhere to be seen in the
 >Newton shot even though it's associates in the Marcel shot are
 >still evident.

Maybe it's just covered up by that triangular panel Newton has
set down very near to where it was. Why immediately jump to the
conclusion that somebody has removed it to "sanitize" the scene?
Besides, to me its obviously just a shard of aluminum foil
separated from the underlying stick. There is nothing to
"sanitize" here.

 >>>If it's not a RAWIN, what is it?

 >>No need to speculate here, since it is a RAWIN.

 >David, the above piece of debris is clearly seen in the Marcel
 >images without any digital enhancement, what part of a ML307
 >target was this?.

See above. You know what part of the problem is here? If you
tear anything up, you are going to end up with bits and pieces
that are difficult to place within the original object. They
look unfamiliar.

Suppose we had torn up Ramey's dress uniform, thrown it on his
rug, and taken some black and white photos. Then we have the
tailor's original diagram, people start pouring over it and
trying to match it to the pieces on the ground.

If you just step back and look at the photos, you can see a torn
sleeve here, a torn trouser leg there, and it is obvious it is
some torn up clothing. But if you look at the itty-bitty pieces
under a microscope, a lot of it doesn't seem familiar anymore.

People start saying, "You claim that is Ramey's dress uniform,
but this alleged sleeve is half an inch off the tailor's specs.
And this piece... where did it come from?"

And for each little fragment you contest, somebody like me comes
along and says, well I can't be sure, but it looks like it was
torn from the lining of the coat. Then you find another fragment
and claim it doesn't match anything on the tailor's diagram.
"Can't be Ramey's dress uniform."

You can chase gnats like this forever. Stop chasing the gnats.
Step back and look at the forest.

 >Also in the Marcel images cables can be seen to the rear of a
 >beam section attached to a foil sheet, what part of a ML307
 >target was this?.

I don't know. I remember looking at your Web site about 2 years
ago and not making out much of anything. I don't have the image
in front of me and your site is down. e-mail me a copy and I'll
have another look. But I suspect it is just another gnat to
chase. It takes a lot of time to refute this stuff, and I have
things I'd rather be doing.

I remember spending some time back then examining your "thick
pieces" and telling you that it looked like an illusion caused
by delaminated foil/paper. I sent back your blow-up with arrows
marking edges which more clearly showed the separation of foil
and paper and shadowing just beneath the top sheet. I never
heard back. You seem to have blown this off and are still
claiming there are anomalous thick pieces in the photos.

 >I too have images of ML307's from 1947/48 and also images of the
 >ML307C Charles Moore still has, and the Army Signal Corp ML307
 >drawings. I _cannot_ resolve these items. I therefore have to
 >conclude these items of debris, along with others I cannot
 >resolve do not belong to an ML307 as the AF concluded. If you
 >too cannot identify just these two items of anomalous debris
 >then I cannot see logically how you can continue in your stance
 >that _all_ the debris in the pictures is a radar reflector,
 >because these two items and few others plainly say it's not.

See my comments above regarding Ramey's suit. Fragments may look
unfamiliar simply because the whole has been torn up and the
spatial context has been partially lost. That doesn't mean they
are from somewhere or something else.

 >The twisted piece of material with the fold I mention is aprox
 >1mm thick and as _both_ sides can be seen to be shiny and
 >metallic in nature, due to the twist, there is no backing paper
 >involved here to beef up the thickness.

There are not enough pixels to accurately resolve the thickness
(see above). Anything thinner than a pixel will still look a
pixel wide. There is no backing paper, because it is glued to
the stick and became separated from the foil. Shards of paper,
however, can still be seen attached to the piece. There is
nothing weird here Neil.

 ><snip>

 >>However, I have looked over some very high resolution images and
 >>have yet to see anything out of the ordinary here. I had hoped
 >>maybe some "real" debris might have inadvertantly been left, but
 >>I have never seen anything like that. It's just torn-up
 >>foil/paper and some stick framework of a Rawin target.

 >Isn't 1mm thick foil sheet with right angle folds out of the
 >ordinary enough? On an ML307??

You can't resolve 1 mm and there is nothing weird about right
angle folds in the foil, which are _commonplace_ in the
construction of the ML307's, where the foil paper is attached
and molded to the stick framework.

 >I'm not making this stuff up, go look and see for yourself in
 >the Marcel Right image... it also has the cable loom that an
 >ML307 didn't have.

 >Neil

Send it on, Neil, I'll try to give it an honest appraisal. But
from what I've seen so far, I'm not too hopeful that it is
anything truly anomalous.

Honestly Neil, enough is enough. You did a great job of getting
together a complete collection of the photos. But then you
started going over everything with a magnifying glass and a pair
of tweezers without fully understanding what you were examining.
You've jumped to a lot of false conclusions as a result. Let's
spend on energies on something more productive.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                 Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:36:23 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:54:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg - Mortellaro


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:24:52 -0600

 >>Date: 16 Jan 2002 17:58:23 -0800
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Grant Cameron <sqquishy@altavista.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Public Memo To James Oberg

 ><snip>

 >>First you cover up the truth of Marciagate. Then you refuse to
 >>follow simple rules. You are a bad man!

 >I trust you have all had sufficient chuckles over this, and it's
 >justified. I stand (or sit, actually) rebuked.

 >Regarding 'truth of Marciagate', from what I know of the
 >controversry, the only untrue allegations concerning Marcia
 >Smith have been posted by Grant Cameron, not me.

Dear List and Errol,

Regarding the above... I recall, as a child, doing the same
thing whenever my mom caught me doing something to Geraldine
that I was _not_ supposed (at that age anyway) to be doing. I
would whine loudly, "But Ma, Joey (deleted) her (deleted), it
wasn't me. And besides, I didn't see her (deleted) anyway!"

And so, another episode in the life of one, Giacomo Q.
Viecquaberg. Tune in again next week, same time, same station,
when we hear Giacomo say, "I was't even there, I was robbin the
register down the street. Honest!"

I would aks, 'How does one spell ptththththhththth?'


Jim Mortellaro, in the voice of Charley (he's new in 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                      Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:58:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >>You assert that Roswell AAFB would have Rawins - implying that
 >>they would be familiar with the device and its uses. In July
 >>1947, Roswell did not have any ground-based radars. Indeed, in
 >>order to practice radar counter-measures, the 509th had to beg
 >>time from either the White Sands or Alamogordo radars.

 >I'm not sure this is quite right. They did request the use of
 >ground-based radars at other facilities, but that seemed to be
 >for the diversification of their practice bombing runs rather
 >than a lack of ground-based radars at RAAF. There were several
 >types of mobile radars and some of those assigned to the base in
 >1947 have suggested that such radars were in place. I have found
 >documentation that places ground-based radars at Roswell in the
 >late summer of 1947 and there were radar technicians assigned to
 >the base throughout 1947. This search continues.

This is from a memo to the Commanding Officer of White Sands
from Capt. Frye of the 8th Army HQ, at Ft Worth on July 3rd,
1947.

'There is a lack of ground radar equipment convenient to Eighth
Air Force Bases which are located at Forth Worth, Texas, Tucson,
Arizona, and Roswell, New Mexico; and since White Sands is
easily within easy flying distance of all three bases, your
cooperation is particularly desirable.'

Note that the Air Base at Roswell is specifically mentioned. If,
as you speculate, diversification was desired, the three bases
would simply have flown against each other's radars. If Roswell
was the only one of the three that had a radar, then Ft Worth
and Tucson would have utilized that system. But, it can be
easily seen that this was not the case, and we have here the 8th
Army trying to beg time from the White Sands people.

As for radar technicians, the bombers of the 509th were, IIRC,
outfitted with airborne radar systems. Thus the need for radar
techs.

I should also point out that most ground radars of the era were
mobile, including the one at White Sands. My guess is that your
sources are understandably a bit fuzzy as to exactly when Radars
were first introduced at the Roswell base. The memo quoted above
seems to be the only authority that can conclusively answer that
question.

BTW - the memo quoted above, as well as the follow-ups from
White Sands, Air Material Command, and Washington are at the
following URL:

http://www.roswellfiles.com/FOIA/WhiteSandsRadar.htm

 >>Given this, it is highly unlikely that anyone at RAAFB would require
 >>the use of a Rawin, let alone have one laying around. Besides,
 >>Rawins would not be of any use to a bomber wing- their primary
 >>military use is for artillery units.

 >Ah, but I think you missed my point which was they were also
 >used in atomic testing such as Operation Crossroads, which the
 >509th and the 1st ATU participated in. The 1st ATU supplied the
 >logistical support which means that the materials were staged
 >and flown out of Roswell and in those equipment packages would
 >have been weather balloons and Rawin targets. All equipment that
 >was not used was eventually returned to Roswell, so in this
 >case, it can be suggested that the balloons and targets could be
 >found in Roswell.

Again - doubtful. In my experience in the military, army-types
are not pack rats. If you don't need it today, throw it away. If
the 1st ATU utilized Rawins, then they would have taken them
back, not left them with the 509th. If they had left them
behind, the 509th would have thrown them out.

(snip)
 >> Brazel's interview makes it
 >>quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >>tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >>not available at the RAFFB.

 >If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
 >remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
 >two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
 >the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.

Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
weather balloons - not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

Brazel initially dismissed his find as junk. It was only when he
found out about the reward that he decided to turn it in. He
also told Wilcox that his find 'looked meteorological'.

 >And we have a farmer in Circleville, Ohio, who found a weather
 >balloon and Rawin target, a man who certainly never seen one
 >before and who was easily able to identify it for what it was.

Not hard, when it had a tag identifying the manufacturer as
'Case Mfc.'.

 >The weather balloon and Rawin targets were not so extraordinary
 >that they defied identification by those who had not seen those
 >specific items.

And yet, even when there was an identifying tag on the wreckage,
the farmer still turned it in as a 'Flying Disk'! Marcel did the
same, although his 'disk' did not have a manufacturer's tag.


 >>Regardless, it is very obvious that Rawins were not in use at
 >>Roswell in '47, and it is unlikely in-the-extreme that one
 >would >be available at the base to use as a 'substitution'.

 >I would have to disagree given the fact that base personnel
 >participated in the atomic testing, and given the fact that
 >winds aloft data were regularly gathered at Roswell. How do you
 >suppose they gathered that data if they had neither radar nor
 >weather balloons and Rawins?

Again, Rawins were not in use for standard weather balloon
systems. They were not tracked by radar, but visually. Seeing as
how weather balloons had been in use long before WWII - and
before radar - the technology was well understood by all
meteorologists of the day. The possible use of Rawins during the
Pacific tests is immaterial. The 509th didn't use them- the
meteorological unit did.

 >>I am, however, pleased to see that you now assert the material
 >>transported to Ft Worth by Marcel was indeed a Rawin/Neoprene
 >>balloon, and that what is in Bond's photos is the same
 >material. >Procter's story is 'compelling' evidence.

 >>So- if the material transported to Ft Worth was a Rawin and
 >>Balloon, then there is only _one_ place where these could have
 >>be found in the Roswell area- Foster's ranch.

 >But that wasn't the only place for them to be found. I believe
 >the assumption here is invalid for the reasons mentioned above.

Well - I try not to assume anything. The available facts
indicate Roswell did not require, use or have available anything
resembling the material pictured on General Ramey's floor. So if
Marcel transported that wreaked balloon and Rawin, then Flight 4
is the only possible source in the area.

 >>>But remember, Colonel Dubose said that the material displayed on
 >>>General Ramey's floor was a weather balloon cover story designed
 >>>to get the reporters off their backs.

 >>Shandara got quite a different story from DuBose.

 >Yes, Shandera alone got quite a different story from DuBose.
 >Everyone else who talked to him learned the same things we did.
 >Those include Billy Cox at Florida Today who commented on this
 >aspect of the controversy, Don Ecker at UFO magazine (US), and
 >even Kris Palmer from Unsolved Mysteries. Our interview (the one
 >conducted by Don Schmitt and Stan Friedman) is on video tape and
 >in the FUFOR archives and held at CUFOS, while Shandera's
 >interview is based solely on his notes with no independent
 >corroboration. Which version should we accept as closer to the
 >factual? That which can be independently verified or that which
 >is based only the memories of a man who had a rooting interest
 >in one specific aspect of the case? According to Shandera, he
 >did not record the interview, he just took notes.

Why should that factor into it? Jamie was most insistent with
his questions- going over the same ground three times. He
wanted a different answer. Yet every time, DuBose came back with
the same answers.

BTW- my own personal take on the answers you got was that DuBose
was referring to the 'simplification' of the explanation given
to the press. Whether he or anyone on Ramey's staff knew
anything about Mogul is open for debate - and I think very
doubtful. However, they decided that it would be best if they
just called it a 'weather balloon', rather then go into details
about Rawins and such. That was the 'cover story' DuBose was
referring to. And DuBose never claimed that there had been a
switch of material.

Yeah - I know, that is just an 'assumption'. But it does fit the
facts, and does not require a conspiracy. <gr>

 >>>And remember that Jesse
 >>>Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
 >>>told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
 >>>recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>>said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
 >>>to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

 >>That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >>Jessies' first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >>'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

 >Actually, I don't think it does. While Marcel might have told
 >Moore that, I don't believe he said it to Pratt. Moore has
 >offered various versions of his transcripts as evidence, but he
 >seems to change them as the situation changes so I'm not
 >convinced that anything we find in them is accurate.

Well, Marcel - in person - repeated this initial statement in the
movie 'UFOs are Real'.

<snip)>

 >We just have to sort through the
 >half- truths, lies, confabulations and mistatements, which can
 >be a difficult thing to do.


Ain't that the truth! <gr>


Regards,

Bruce Hutchinson











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

               Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:15:43 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:16:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro


A commentary.

I've ordered the book based on the reviews I've read and knowing
the work of Dr. Maccabee, I plan on enjoying it. However there
are some misinterpretations mentioned in posts which require my
comments.

'Real vs perceived,' that is the question. So damned many times
on this List have I explained this conundrum that I am getting
sick and tired of having to do it yet again. Alas, the truth of
my own understanding of what has happened to me needs to be told
again. Likely, this is the tenth time.

I perceive that I have had experiences. In my own memory, these
are real events, events which no one may cloud with claptrap and
skeptibunking. Real as the back of my hand. So real that the
events in my life have left me sorely ill with the genuine
physical ailments so common to the abductee. Among these, IBS...
severe headaches... serious back issues... depression... and a
life of memories which I have explained to one of us on this
list by phone, which have not changed in 55 years... I swear it.
Not one change.

To me these events (as I've said so many times before) are real.
But there is the culture, the education and the intellect which
says, "Hey, this stuff cannot possibly be!" There-in rests the
dichotomy. There is an honest realization that these events
might very well be due to infection by that methanogen Bruce
Maccabee described in a recent post, or some paranormal out of
body... who knows what... experience.

But whatever it is, it is and will _always_ be real to me. And
people who do not question their experiences, search for a
truth, examine _every_ aspect of it's nature, are fooling
themselves big time.

This is not the Peanut Gallery. There is too much at stake to
merely say "It happened" and give no credence to any other
possibility. Of course, this is strictly my opinion. But my
objection is that there are some on this list who, differing in
that position, presume that to do what I do is wrong, against
the code. Not in consort with what an experiencer should do...
tough! I think that to not question is ludicrous in the extreme.

To that I respond... well, never mind what I respond. It is just
too silly, immature and ridiculous not to question everything
until the absolute truth is known.

Otherwise, why the hell do people who call themselves
researchers, some of whom really are, spend their lives looking
at and studying this phenom? To say whether one single event is
real? Or to investigate _every_ event in order to come to a
general conclusion of absolute truth. If it were merely a fait
accompli, then this list is redundant. Let's everyone believe
_you_ , whomever _you_ may be. And nothing else is necessary.

Hi, I'm Doctor Gordy, and I've invented Avacor. Are you going
bald, well rub this crap on your head and I swear, you'll have
the hairiest fingertips you ever saw. Honest. Believe me. Buy
it. Buy it now. And smoke Gripple Grappa. It won't make you
sick, in fact, it's good for the digestion.

Right.

Jim Mortellaro

PS: Say, it _is_ Maccabbbee ain't it? God man, why don't you
change that darn thingy to some neat and simple Itralian name?
Huh?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 18

                 Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:52:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:18:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Velez


 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 21:26:18 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:08:56 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

 ><snip>

 >>From the Prologue I became deeply impressed with how accurately
 >>Bruce managed to convey/portray, what its like for someone who
 >>has experienced 'missing time' in connection with an
 >>uncomfortably close-up UFO/occupant encounter - an abduction. He
 >>weaves into the story many of the details that are associated
 >>with the experience of UFO/abduction. His 'case study' is so
 >>faithful and is so deadly spot-on in the telling, that for most
 >>of the book I wondered to myself if Bruce himself is an
 >>abductee? How else could he know so many of the nuances of human
 >>psychology and response as it relates to those who have actually
 >>had to live through such a life altering experience(s).

Hiya Mac,

You wrote:

 >I heartily agree with John's take on 'Abduction In My Life' - see:

 >http://mactonnies.com/ufobooks.html

It was yours and Katharina Wilson's earlier reviews that
motivated me to put it on my 'things to do' list. Lord knows I
have little time for reading now-a-days, (books anyway) but the
reviews I read piqued my interest enough to encourage me to
'make time' for it. That, and the fact that Bruce asked me to
read it and comment on it.  :)

 >The part of the book I had the most trouble accepting was the
 >narrator's ignorance of the UFO/abduction phenomenon; even if
 >you don't have the slightest interest in the subject, it's hard
 >to avoid in our media-saturated environment.

Not true Mac. I knew little or nothing about 'ufology' or the
details of any 'cases' going in. The revelation of my own
intimate connection to the phenomenon came as a complete shock
to me. Honestly, it never would have occurred to me to even
consider alien abduction as a viable explanation.

It was the testimony of the abductees in Budd Hopkins' book,
"Missing Time" that turned me inside out. I spent that first
night chain smoking, pacing the floor, and muttering out loud.
Some thing I had never done before in my life. I was so shaken
and upset that I cried that night. As if a loved one had died.
It turns out that the "loved one" I was mourning was me. The
'me' I was before I learned the truth.

I kept asking myself, 'how' could these people (the abductees in
Budd's book) _know_ things that I had never told to anyone.
Things that I had never before heard others give utterance to.
Things that I had always kept to myself and 'secret' for fear of
being thought of as a nutcase by my friends, family or peers. Of
all things, the mere thought that all my oddball, unexplained
memories of strange, and most times frightening events, were
somehow connected to UFOs and aliens was completely abhorrent to
me. I am a lifetime amateur astronomer and chess player, someone
who loves science and the beauty of logic. My entire world view
was shattered into ten thousand tiny pieces by the revelation.

I have always prided myself in being a well grounded person and
a man of common sense. The process I went through was very
similar to that of the narrator in Bruce's story. If I was to
sign my name to the bottom of the one page Prologue to Bruce's
book, I wouldn't have to alter a word of it to keep it true.
Like the narrator, I _was_ for all intents and purposes ignorant
of the reported details surrounding UFOs, abductions, or
ufology.

Aside from the fact that the narrator character in the book is a
'tool' that Bruce used to educate the reader, (who learns as the
narrator learns) I found I could relate to his learning process
and to all the many emotional and intellectual changes that he
goes through. Even down to the way he initially walks on eggs
about the subject with his family members. It was all a close
parallel to my own real-life experience.

All of the above is part of the reasons I enjoyed the story so
much. I found I could relate to the process that both the narrator
and the subjects/abductees went through. Maccabee nails all the
nuances and details pretty accurately.

 >I recall hearing that the two most-perused subjects on the
 >Web are sex and UFOs, in that order.

Sex is popular and rampant on the Internet?  No! I don't believe
you. I'll have to schedule a couple of nights this week so that
I can personally verify your outrageous claims. I'll report back
to you after I take my right hand to the barber for a haircut.
:-0


Warm regards,

John Velez  ;)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                         Roswell - The Tourist Trap

From: Steve Owens <steve@usviews.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:43:27 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 08:30:15 -0500
Subject: Roswell - The Tourist Trap


This concerns the 'Roswell Threads' and the notion that Roswell,
New Mexico owes its recovery from the Walker AFB closing to the
ballyhoo and following controversy concerning a possible UFO
crash.

First, Roswell had already "recovered" from the Walker closing.
In 1976 Roswell was named as an "All American" city because of
this success. Roswell's leaders used Walker as a manufacturing
base and as a training center for jumbo jet pilots among other
things. The base housing was converted into affordable housing
for low to middle income families once the "ghost town" housing
in town was claimed. Companies like Luftwaffe and Transportation
Manufacturing Corp. came into Roswell to join the established
ranching, farming, and oil based industries.

Roswell's ties to the space community came long before the claim
of a crash. Robert H. Goddard is cherished in Roswell history
and there are several institutions in Roswell named in his honor
to include a high school and a space museum complete with
planetarium.

The only reason the center of town (Second Street and Main) has
been made into a 'tourist trap' is because there is a market for
it. The Chamber of Commerce has used the Alien controversy to
help the town. Why not? However, the notion that Roswell exists
only to service the tourists resulting from the crash
controversy is absurd. The town was thriving before story hit
the big time and will after it recedes.

One final note: I grew up in Roswell. Until about 1988 none of
my friends and none of their families ever talked about there
having been a crash. My dad pastored a church full of
'old-timers' and families that had been in Roswell for
generations. No one at any time mentioned anything like what was
later reported regarding the crash. Now several have crash
stories. More than one has told me the stories they tell are
rubbish but that it makes them a little money on the side.

I really don't know what happened around Roswell in July 1947. I
do know that there are truck loads of misinformation being
circulated as fact because 'investigators' choose to hear what
they want instead of substantiating claims.


Go Coyotes.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:48:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 08:33:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee


 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:08:56 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'


 >Abduction In My Life
 >by
 >Bruce Maccabee


 >Hi All,

 >From the Prologue I became deeply impressed with how accurately
 >Bruce managed to convey/portray, what its like for someone who
 >has experienced 'missing time' in connection with an
 >uncomfortably close-up UFO/occupant encounter - an abduction. He
 >weaves into the story many of the details that are associated
 >with the experience of UFO/abduction. His 'case study' is so
 >faithful and is so deadly spot-on in the telling, that for most
 >of the book I wondered to myself if Bruce himself is an
 >abductee? How else could he know so many of the nuances of human
 >psychology and response as it relates to those who have actually
 >had to live through such a life altering experience(s).

Naturally I greatly appreciate John's review of my book. but
_Don't_ read this book... if you are already an expert and know
everything.

Instead, give it to the _intended_ readers, namely those who
would not ordinarily pick up a UFO book - and certainly not a
UFO fact book - to read.

This is intended for the un-informed audience - although the
philosophical discussions presented are intended for those who
know what is going on.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                      Kinross Incident And Gas Relases

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 01:55:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 08:49:15 -0500
Subject: Kinross Incident And Gas Relases


Hi all,

This link mentions the possiblity of a huge gas release due to
volcanic action in the Congo. Methane and C02 are the likely
ingredients for this scenario.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_1768000/1768321.stm

No Volcanoes in Michigan, of course, but the mechanics of this
are-interesting.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:32:04 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:01:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies


 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:52:54 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

<snip>

 >Hiya Mac,

 >You wrote:

 >>I heartily agree with John's take on 'Abduction In
 >My Life' - see:

 >>http://mactonnies.com/ufobooks.html

 >It was yours and Katharina Wilson's earlier reviews that
 >motivated me to put it on my 'things to do' list. Lord knows I
 >have little time for reading now-a-days, (books anyway) but the
 >reviews I read piqued my interest enough to encourage me to
 >'make time' for it. That, and the fact that Bruce asked me to
 >read it and comment on it. :)

 >>The part of the book I had the most trouble accepting was the
 >>narrator's ignorance of the UFO/abduction phenomenon; even if
 >>you don't have the slightest interest in the subject, it's hard
 >>to avoid in our media-saturated environment.

 >Not true Mac. I knew little or nothing about 'ufology' or the
 >details of any 'cases' going in. The revelation of my own
 >intimate connection to the phenomenon came as a complete shock
 >to me. Honestly, it never would have occurred to me to even
 >consider alien abduction as a viable explanation.

Thanks for your perspective on this. I guess I approached
Maccabee's character too self-centrically. I've grown up on a
diet of "weird" reading material, and the idea of alien
intervention seems almost like a "given" to me.

Please note that I'm addressing the _idea_ of alien
intervention, not personal experience. In all probability, if I
had a traumatic CEIII I'd be grasping for alternative
explanations right and left. The "obvious" might not be so
obvious after all.

I still think Maccabee's character's vocation as a science
fiction writer was probably a bad choice, but I can appreciate
the usefulness of this as a narrative device.

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                 Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 02:39:01 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:04:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Hatch


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:15:43 EST
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >A commentary.

<snip>


 >I've ordered the book based on the reviews I've read and knowing
 >the work of Dr. Maccabee, I plan on enjoying it. However there
 >are some misinterpretations mentioned in posts which require my
 >comments.

 >'Real vs perceived,' that is the question. So damned many times
 >on this List have I explained this conundrum that I am getting
 >sick and tired of having to do it yet again. Alas, the truth of
 >my own understanding of what has happened to me needs to be told
 >again. Likely, this is the tenth time.

 >I perceive that I have had experiences. In my own memory, these
 >are real events, events which no one may cloud with claptrap and
 >skeptibunking. Real as the back of my hand. So real that the
 >events in my life have left me sorely ill with the genuine
 >physical ailments so common to the abductee. Among these, IBS...
 >severe headaches... serious back issues... depression... and a
 >life of memories which I have explained to one of us on this
 >list by phone, which have not changed in 55 years... I swear it.
 >Not one change.

 >To me these events (as I've said so many times before) are real.
 >But there is the culture, the education and the intellect which
 >says, "Hey, this stuff cannot possibly be!" There-in rests the
 >dichotomy. There is an honest realization that these events
 >might very well be due to infection by that methanogen Bruce
 >Maccabee described in a recent post, or some paranormal out of
 >body... who knows what... experience.

 >But whatever it is, it is and will _always_ be real to me. And
 >people who do not question their experiences, search for a
 >truth, examine _every_ aspect of it's nature, are fooling
 >themselves big time.

Hello Jim: If I may butt in here..

For somebody like me, having seen nothing I could really call a
UFO, and no abduction symptoms whatsoever, its all too easy to
say that its all in so-and-so's head.

What impresses (and mystifies) me is not only the consistency of
details, but the fervent emphasis that you and others have
expressed, on the absolute personal reality of these
experiences.

Here we have people who seem perfectly normal in every other
respect, with tales that just totally tax peoples ability to
believe.

This is _not_ like religious beliefs. In religion (as I see it)
we have a sort of suspension of logic and reason, which enables
the adherent to "believe" whatever dogma suits him or her the
best.

The abductees, at least the sensible ones, are searching for any
decent explanation at all, even a possibly psychological one.
That's just the opposite of taking things on faith.

A classical mental case may "see and hear" things that just
ain't there. They are extremely "real" to such a person. But!
You and some others just don't sound like mental cases to me,
even if still others do.

This leaves the reasoned non-experiencer dangling on a fence.
Wherein lies the reality of all this?

I would not exclude psychiatric or psychological examination. I
would bet that many abductees have sought professional
assistance. If nothing else, the shrink can hopefully confirm
the presence or absence of any delusional traits.

If absent... then other explanations simply must be sought. I
would not give up hope for some sort of tangible evidence.

<snip>

 >PS: Say, it _is_ Maccabbbee ain't it? God man, why don't you
 >change that darn thingy to some neat and simple Itralian name?
 >Huh?

PS from LH: I see I'm not the only one who cannot spell Bruce's
name properly.

PPS: The *U* Beer clock is now past midnight (PST). Alas its too
late now! ...Aaaaaaargh!



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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                       Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:37:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:07:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Friedman


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >>>And remember that Jesse
 >>>Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
 >>>told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
 >>>recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>>said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
 >>>to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

 >>That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >>Jessies's first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >>'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

 >Actually, I don't think it does. While Marcel might have told
 >Moore that, I don't believe he said it to Pratt. Moore has
 >offered various versions of his transcripts as evidence, but he
 >seems to change them as the situation changes so I'm not
 >convinced that anything we find in them is accurate.

 >I think there may have been some pictures taken in Roswell with
 >the real debris but I have never found them and I know of no one
 >who has ever seen them. On the other hand, when Marcel was shown
 >the pictures taken by Dr. Johnson in Fort Worth, he told
 >reporter Johnny Mann that those photographs showed the weather
 >balloon. He didn't seen to hesitate in that identification.

 >This part of the story has become quite confused by those who
 >had agendas to push. Moore has changed portions of his
 >transcripts to suit his purposes. Shandera has offered an
 >alternative story but can provide neither tapes nor
 >documentation to substantiate his claims. Dr. Johnson has
 >radically altered what he has said, attempting to convince us
 >all that there was real debris in General Ramey's office. There
 >are reasons to believe that weather balloons and Rawins were
 >available at the RAAF in 1947. We just have to sort through the
 >half- truths, lies, confabulations and mistatements, which can
 >be a difficult thing to do.


I think there are a number of points that have been left out.

1. We know another place not too far away from Roswell where
there were lots of weather balloons and radar targets, namely
White Sands and Alamogordo Army Air Field.. now Holloman . They
were launched 72,48,24, and 4 hours before each V-2 launch
according to the Alamogordo newspaper on July 10. The front page
headline story that day was "Fantasy of "Flying Disc" Explained
Here" with 3 related pictures.Balloon and target combinations
were actually launched for the press according to the
article.The people involved worked for Air Materiel Command.

2. We know that General Nathan Twining head of the Air Materiel
Command at Wright Field had a bunch of people working on Mogul
and other balloon projects at AAAF.

3. We know from many newspaper articles that week that Twining
had already been tasked to look into the flying saucer stuff
especially the question of whether they might be from a Secret
US R and D Projects.

4. We know from the flight logs of Twining and his pilot that he
arrived at AAAF from Dayton on Monday, July 7. and Stayed in NM
until that Friday, July 11. He was very close to General
Vandenberg, then vice chief of Staff of the Army Air Force.
Chief Spaatz was off in Seattle and then in Port Aransas, Texas,
fishing that week.The staged launch on July 9 must have had
Twining's approval if not direction. He certainly could have
arranged for balloon junk to be sent to Ramey.

5. Many of the many newspaper articles about Roswell which
appeared in PM papers from Chicago West,on July 8, and grew
throughout the day, as calls were made to Roswell for more info,
stated the debris was found "last week". This surely ruled out
the Mogul Balloon-being-found-on-June 14 nonsense suddenly
stated on July 9.

6.If all there was was a single weather balloon, as suddenly and
belatedly recalled by Cavitt, (covering only 20 feet square),
Brazel would have put it all in his truck and taken it to the
sherriff's office. There would have been no reason for Marcel
and Cavitt to take the long rough trip back to the Foster Ranch
in his wake. No highways then; a big cross country stretch.
Recall that the coverup article RDR on July 9 said the area
covered was 250' in diameter. Also please recall that there were
no articles in the big morning papers on July 8 about Roswell so
the conflicting testimony would not have been obvious.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:13:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 ><snip>

 >>>Brazel's interview makes it
 >>>quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >>>tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >>>not available at the RAFFB.

 >>If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
 >>remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
 >>two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
 >>the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.

 >Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
 >weather balloons

How do you know that's what he had found?

 >- not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
 >altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
 >Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
 >transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
 >consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
 >especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
 >brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
 >true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

So you are saying a kid who has previously only seen red and
green balloons wouldn't recognize a balloon if it were some
other color? That seems to be what you are saying. Two grown men
couldn't tell they had found a balloon. Blanchard at the base
couldn't recognize a balloon either, nor I imagine other people
there who probably saw the debris.

Incidentally, Marcel was quite familiar with electronics, being
a radio ham. So if there had been a radiosonde in the debris, he
probably would have recognized it. He had also taken a
month-long radar intelligence course at the end of the war and
one of his job titles was radar-intelligence officer. He would
no doubt be familiar with the foil/paper chaff used in radar
jamming, since part of his course involved radar
countermeasures. This was the same stuff used to make the
Rawins. (See also Dubose's comment below from 1947, where he
noted the similarity of the chaff to the material in the radar
target.)

So here's the scenario you seem to be trying to paint. Marcel
comes across some obvious balloon material, but supposedly can't
recognize it because it is grey. He is also completely unable to
recognize aluminum foil laminated to paper, even though it's the
same stuff used in the radar chaff, or to wrap chewing gum for
that matter. He also apparently couldn't recognize balsa wood
and Scotch tape, two more "exotic" materials used to make the
Rawins.

 From this he jumps to the conclusion that he must have found
a flying saucer.

Somehow he convinces base commander Blanchard of the same thing,
and Blanchard, for unimaginable reasons, issues the press
release. Cavitt, who was with Marcel and claims he realized it
was a weather balloon all along, can't be bothered to ever tell
Marcel this, or Blanchard either. This doesn't sound like an
elite AF base charged with flying A-bombs -- it sounds like F
Troop.

The press release causes a press feeding frenzy that not only
descended on Roswell, but Gen. Ramey and the Eighth AF in Fort
Worth, and into the upper reaches of the Pentagon, including
acting Chief of Staff Vandenberg. There were going to be some
awfully angry generals demanding answers and some scalps for
such a colossal and embarrassing foul-up.

But absolutely nothing happened afterwards. There was no
investigation. There were no reports written explaining what had
happened. Marcel got recommissioned and year later was still on
the job as head of intelligence at Roswell. Both the SAC and the
Pentagon wanted him for higher intelligence work. The SAC wrote
the Pentagon they already had him in mind for a "key" position.
The SAC briefly made him chief of some sort of foreign air
intelligence division. This is a man who supposedly couldn't
recognize rubber balloons, chewing gum wrapper material, Scotch
tape, and wood used to make kid's kites.

As this was happening, senior officers were writing reviews of Marcel.
Blanchard's review the following spring and that summer were the best of
Marcel's career to that point. He called him "highly dependable" and gave
him superior ratings on his ability to reach logical decisions. Does this
sound like somebody who couldn't identify a balloon as a balloon?

Col. Dubose who indorsed Blanchard's first evaluation,
recommended him for Air Command and Staff School. Both Blanchard
and Dubose had earlier recommended his promotion to Lt. Col. in
the AF Reserve.

Col. John Ryan, who was replacing Blanchard at Roswell as Marcel
was being transferred, said Marcel's career was "most
outstanding" and "most exemplary." Gen. Ramey likewise referred
to Marcel as "outstanding" and future command officer material.
He also registered a mild protest over his transfer, saying he
had nobody within his command to replace him. I guess Ramey had
nothing but incompetent intelligence officers at his disposal --
eh?

So all the officers who would have known whether Marcel had
screwed up are instead praising him. Ramey's statements are
especially telling here.

It should also be pointed out that Marcel wasn't alone in
thinking the material was anomalous. E.g., Bill Brazel Jr.
reported independently the exact same physical properties as
Marcel for the debris fragments he found afterwards. Bill
Rickett, one of the CIC men in Marcel's office, spoke of the
thin metal material he was unable to bend. Gen. Arthur Exon said
he was informed of the physical properties of the material while
he was at Wright Field. Some of the descriptions matched those
of Marcel. Obviously, they wouldn't be testing an aluminum foil
radar target at the Wright Field labs.

These were just a few of the witnesses to the anomalous debris.
But like a typical Roswell debunker, you make it sound like this
was only Marcel's story.

 >Brazel initially dismissed his find as junk.

Says who? His neighbors the Proctors said the usually taciturn
Brazel was unusually animated and mystified by what he had
found. This was before he went to Roswell and knew anything
about the flying saucers.

Loretta Proctor said Brazel spoke of the anomalous "memory foil"
and also brought a small piece of the "balsa-like" material,
except unlike balsa, it was hard and smooth, couldn't be marked
with a knife, and was unaffected by flame. These were the same
anomalous properties for this material described by Marcel and
Brazel Jr.

 >It was only when he
 >found out about the reward that he decided to turn it in. He
 >also told Wilcox that his find 'looked meteorological'.

Well UP quoted Wilcox as claiming Brazel thought it might be a
"weather meter." But Brazel contradicted this statement by
Wilcox in his interview later that evening. According to the
Roswell Daily Record story, Brazel said that "'whispered kinda
confidential like'" to Wilcox "that he might have found a flying
disk." No "weather meter" here.

More tellingly, at the very end of the interview, he
categorically denied that it was a weather balloon. "Brazel said
that he had previously found two weather observation balloons on
the ranch, but that what he found this time did not in any way
resemble either of these. 'I am sure that what I found was not
any weather observation balloon.'"

So if he never though it was any sort of weather balloon, why
would he tell Wilcox he thought it might be a "weather meter"?
And why would he instead, when interviewed, claim he had told
Wilcox that he thought he had found a flying disk?

Wilcox's statement may be better understood when one realizes he
was giving contradictory statements to the press, such as when
Brazel came to town (UP: "day before yesterday" or Sunday; AP
"Monday") and when Brazel had found the object (UP: "About 3
weeks ago"; AP: "Two or three days before") Furthermore,
according to AP, Wilcox declined to elaborate on the description
of the object saying "I'm working with those fellows at the
base."

What this tells us is that Wilcox was not speaking as an
independent agent. His family tell us he was threatened.
Likewise AP reporter Jason Kellahin knew Wilcox well and said he
spoke to him around the time he also interviewed Brazel at the
Daily Record. Kellahin wrote in his affidavit, "Wilcox said the
military indicated to him it would be best if he did not say
anything."

 >>And we have a farmer in Circleville, Ohio, who found a weather
 >>balloon and Rawin target, a man who certainly never seen one
 >>before and who was easily able to identify it for what it was.

 >Not hard, when it had a tag identifying the manufacturer as
 >'Case Mfc.'.

 >>The weather balloon and Rawin targets were not so extraordinary
 >>that they defied identification by those who had not seen those
 >>specific items.

 >And yet, even when there was an identifying tag on the wreckage,
 >the farmer still turned it in as a 'Flying Disk'! Marcel did the
 >same, although his 'disk' did not have a manufacturer's tag.

Immediately above, you claim Brazel thought it meteorological.
Now your claiming he turned it in as a flying disk. Make up your
mind.

You are also begging the question by assuming Marcel did find a
Rawin and turned it in as a flying disk. Maybe he found a flying
disk and turned it in as a flying disk.

<snip>

 >>>I am, however, pleased to see that you now assert the material
 >>>transported to Ft Worth by Marcel was indeed a Rawin/Neoprene
 >>>balloon, and that what is in Bond's photos is the same
 >>>material. Procter's story is 'compelling' evidence.

 >>>So- if the material transported to Ft Worth was a Rawin and
 >>>Balloon, then there is only _one_ place where these could have
 >>>be found in the Roswell area- Foster's ranch.

 >>But that wasn't the only place for them to be found. I believe
 >>the assumption here is invalid for the reasons mentioned above.

 >Well - I try not to assume anything. The available facts
 >indicate Roswell did not require, use or have available anything
 >resembling the material pictured on General Ramey's floor. So if
 >Marcel transported that wreaked balloon and Rawin, then Flight 4
 >is the only possible source in the area.

Absolutely, totally wrong!! You are obviously just recounting
old debunking material. Even Charles Moore of Mogul has
backtracked on this, and now acknowledges that a White Sands
weather station, only 35 miles from where they launched the
Moguls, was using them as well for V-2 launches.

So that was certainly another possible source. And since Ramey
and Newton and the FBI telegram in 1947 all spoke of a singular
balloon and radar target, there is no reason to presume that
what was shown in the photos had to come from Mogul. The crashed
Mogul was supposed to be multi-balloon, multi-Rawin, remember?
Furthermore, the Fort Worth photos, when carefully analyzed,
clearly indicate that there are only the partial remains of
_one_ target.

Yet Brazel in his interview said he rolled all of the sticks and
foil into one bundle. If this was a Mogul, one would expect more
than one target in that mix, and this should be evident in some
way in the photos.

But no. There is not enough material there to account for even
one complete target. There are no extra sticks and no extra foil
panels. This was indeed the remains of _one_ target. And without
multiple targets, there goes a key piece of evidence that what
Ramey displayed came from a Mogul.

Instead, it could have been a singular Rawin that Ramey had
flown in from somewhere else, such as the White Sands weather
station, or Fort Sill, or the Army weather station at Kansas
City which used them. Those are the closest places that I know
about, all less than 2 hours by plane. Furthermore, the Army
weather station near Wright Field used them. One was
demonstrated at Boeing Field in Seattle the next day, used by
the U.S. Weather Bureau. Within only a few days, the newspapers
reported two or three that crashed in California, several more
in Ohio, one in Kansas, one in Arizona, and one in New York.

Obviously the Rawins were used elsewhere. Even Fort Worth AAF
demonstrated one on July 10. They invited a Fort Worth
Star-Telegram photographer out for a Rawin demonstration launch
that morning. Three photos were taken, one of which appeared in
the Star-Telegram the next day with a caption saying that the
radar targets explained Roswell and the nationwide flying saucer
reports. Also pictured in those photos was a radar trailer. Yet
neither the Rawin nor the radar trailer were supposed to be at
the base. Either that is wrong, or they simply brought them in
from some nearby location that did have them.

So why couldn't Ramey simply fly in a Rawin from some nearby
location on Tuesday? That would be much easier than bringing in
a Rawin _plus_ an entire radar trailer for his little debunking
demonstration two days later.

 >>>>But remember, Colonel Dubose said that the material displayed on
 >>>>General Ramey's floor was a weather balloon cover story designed
 >>>>to get the reporters off their backs.

 >>>Shandara got quite a different story from DuBose.

 >>Yes, Shandera alone got quite a different story from DuBose.
 >>Everyone else who talked to him learned the same things we did.
 >>Those include Billy Cox at Florida Today who commented on this
 >>aspect of the controversy, Don Ecker at UFO magazine (US), and
 >>even Kris Palmer from Unsolved Mysteries. Our interview (the one
 >>conducted by Don Schmitt and Stan Friedman) is on video tape and
 >>in the FUFOR archives and held at CUFOS, while Shandera's
 >>interview is based solely on his notes with no independent
 >>corroboration. Which version should we accept as closer to the
 >>factual? That which can be independently verified or that which
 >>is based only the memories of a man who had a rooting interest
 >>in one specific aspect of the case? According to Shandera, he
 >>did not record the interview, he just took notes.

 >Why should that factor into it? Jamie was most insistent with
 >his questions- going over the same ground three times. He
 >wanted a different answer. Yet every time, DuBose came back with
 >the same answers.

Why don't you provide us with a tape of Shandera's interview so
Dubose's alleged statements can be independently verified. Until
then, it's just Shandera's word against opposing _documented_
statements from Dubose that are on tape or in his affidavit.

 >BTW- my own personal take on the answers you got was that DuBose
 >was referring to the 'simplification' of the explanation given
 >to the press. Whether he or anyone on Ramey's staff knew
 >anything about Mogul is open for debate - and I think very
 >doubtful.

The day before this, Col. Ryan (then Ramey's operations officer)
was talking to AP about the radar targets in connection with an
article on the possible origins of the flying disks (this
article appeared, e.g., in the Roswell Morning Dispatch on July
8). So that's one officer.

Ramey was no shrinking violet himself in opining that it was a
radar target. The San Francisco Examiner said they called him
within an hour of when the press release went out over the wire,
they were the first to talk to him, and reported Ramey described
a weather balloon and radar target to them just like the ones
launched everyday over in Oakland. (So the Examiner reporter was
also familiar with the targets. It seems everybody knew about
the targets except the morons over at Roswell.)

The Examiner article then went on to say that a weather officer
was finally called in and made "a definite identification."
Newton came in later, _after_ Ramey was already explicitly IDing
the object as a radar target.

United Press that evening also quoted Ramey early on saying that
it appeared to be "the remains of a weather balloon and radar
reflector." I know Ramey said this early because this quote
appeared in a San Franciso News story the evening of July 8.
This was well before weather officer Newton had identified it
because you can't find a story from July 8 mentioning Newton's
ID. That was all reported the next day. (More on this below.)

(Another UP-based story the next day that appeared in New York
PM, repeated the quote and had Ramey adding that he hadn't let
anybody see it or photograph it yet because of the security lid.
This is another indication that the UP quote occurred before the
photos were taken or Newton was brought over to make the
official identification.)

Yet another news story from the evening of July 8 in the Los
Angeles Herald-Express had the blazing headline "Army Finds
'Flying Saucer' -- General Believes It Is Radar Weather Target."
Well, that makes it pretty clear, doesn't it?

A last-minute AP bulletin added before the Herald-Express went
to press that evening had Ramey announcing that the object was
being shipped by air to Wright Field. We know exactly the time
of this AP bulletin because of a surviving chronology of AP
bulletins published in the Daily Illini the next day. The
bulletin was slightly less than an hour and a half after the AP
first announced the base 'flying disk' press release. On the
other hand, Newton's ID wasn't announced by AP until 3 hours
afterwards. So as in the S.F. Examiner story, Ramey was opining
about the radar target ID early on and Newton wasn't brought
until much later. Ramey obviously knew all about radar targets.

The Herald-Express coverage also added two last-minute bulletins
from International News Service, one quoting Ramey as saying
that the 'disk' was "evidently nothing other than a weather or
radar instrument of some sort."

The other bulletin concerned "Senator Ed C. Johnson, of
Colorado, who told the Denver Post by long distance from
Washington today that the object found in New Mexico may have
been 'either a radar target or a meteorological balloon.'"

So now a U.S. Senator had gotten into the act, way before any
official identification by weather officer Newton in Fort Worth.
Where did Senator Johnson get his information?

One of Ramey's intelligence officers, Major Kirton, was another
contact person with the press and also the FBI. According to the
Dallas Morning news, Kirton told them at 5:30 that the object
was a "Rawin" target, the identification was final, and the
special flight to Wright Field was cancelled.

Now let's do some math. The press release hit the wire in
Roswell around 3:30 MDT or 4:30 CDT in Fort Worth. Thus only
about an hour after the release, one of Ramey's people was
announcing the identification, again before Ramey had brought in
weather officer Newton. Furthermore, Kirton announced the flight
had been cancelled before Ramey had announced it after Newton's
ID.

Even Col. Dubose had something to say. According to an article
in the Fort Worth Star Telegram the next morning Dubose said the
tinfoil on the kite was similar to radar chaff used during the
war and also devices on life rafts to facilitate air-sea rescue.
(Dubose would know about such things since he later headed AF
air rescue, and so should have Marcel, since he had the radar
intelligence course.)

Furthermore, the article stated that "as soon as the 'disk' was
brought into Gen. Ramey's office, he and Col. Dubose tabbed it
as a weather device. The weather officer merely made
identification positive."

It seems everybody on Ramey's staff knew about radar targets or
similar devices and were announcing identifications before the
official identification by Newton.

Now how could all this be (including Kirton's overly early
"final" identification and announcement of the special flight
cancellation) unless the whole thing was a set-up from the
beginning?

 >However, they decided that it would be best if they
 >just called it a 'weather balloon', rather then go into details
 >about Rawins and such. That was the 'cover story' DuBose was
 >referring to. And DuBose never claimed that there had been a
 >switch of material.

 >Yeah - I know, that is just an 'assumption'. But it does fit the
 >facts, and does not require a conspiracy. <gr>

Nyahh, it doesn't fit the _documented_ facts. Ramey and minions
and even a US Senator were identifying it as a radar target
before Newton's official identification, according to news
article of the day.

Furthermore, they didn't just call it a weather balloon. They
specifically identified it as a radar target and also used the
term Rawin device back in 1947. Newton did and so did Kirton
earlier on.

 >>>>And remember that Jesse
 >>>>Marcel, Sr., when shown the pictures taken in Ramey's office
 >>>>told reporter Johnny Mann that it wasn't the stuff that he had
 >>>>recovered in New Mexico. And, remember that Jesse Marcel, Jr.,
 >>>>said that the debris in the photographs bore a gross resemblance
 >>>>to what he had seen, but that it wasn't the same stuff.

 >>>That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >>>Jessies' first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >>>'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

Marcel never said anything like this to Bob Pratt. The subject
never came up in Pratt's interview. Where did you get this false
tidbit?

 >>Actually, I don't think it does. While Marcel might have told
 >>Moore that, I don't believe he said it to Pratt. Moore has
 >>offered various versions of his transcripts as evidence, but he
 >>seems to change them as the situation changes so I'm not
 >>convinced that anything we find in them is accurate.

 >Well, Marcel - in person - repeated this initial statement in the
 >movie 'UFOs are Real'.

Well, if you can speculate, I can speculate too. Suppose, for
the sake of argument, Marcel had found a flying saucer. Then it
stands to reason that internal Army photos would have been taken
of him with the debris in Roswell and/or in Fort Worth as
historical documentation. Being photos of real flying saucer
debris, they would be highly classified and never made public.

Then, according to this scenario, public photos of him were
taken soon afterwards with the substituted radar target. But 30+
years later, all he remembers are the Army photo or photos with
the real debris.

But when finally shown one of the photos of him with the radar
target instead of just being asked about what happened in Fort
Worth, there was no confusion. He said quite simply that the
photo was "staged."

Another person who doesn't remember Marcel's photos being taken
with the radar target was the photographer himself, J. Bond
Johnson. Thus Marcel apparently wouldn't be alone in not
remembering this photo session. Nobody said his memory was
perfect, particularly in impromptu interviews 30+ years after
the fact.

E.g., two apparent mistakes he made (as also reported in "The
Roswell Incident") was saying that he got back early Monday
evening and the story had already been leaked by the base PIO.
First, we know that the base press release didn't go out until
the following afternoon. Second, his memory of when he returned
disagrees with his son's of being late at night, and also a
quoted statement of Marcel's in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram of
July 9, 1947, where Marcel said he returned "early Tuesday
morning."

On the other hand, most of what Marcel recounted in his
interviews tracked quite well with what can be determined from
his military file, news articles of the day, and interviews with
other witnesses. Marcel's story has a lot of corroborating
evidence.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                Re: Kinross Incident And Gas Relases - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 10:54:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:17:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross Incident And Gas Relases - Ledger


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Kinross Incident And Gas Relases
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 01:55:47 -0800

 >Hi all,

 >This link mentions the possiblity of a huge gas release due to
 >volcanic action in the Congo. Methane and C02 are the likely
 >ingredients for this scenario.

 >http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_1768000/1768321.stm

 >No Volcanoes in Michigan, of course, but the mechanics of this
 >are-interesting.



Hi GT and List,

See also at: http://www.llnl.gov/str/Durham.html

In this article it mentions that even when a match is held to
the methane ice, the latter will burn. An oil well drill heated
up from the boring above hydrated methane can cause an explosion
once it penetrates the strata of hydrate.

Spooky and dangerous stuff.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                     Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Bassett

From: Stephen Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 10:53:13 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:21:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set - Bassett


 >From: Kurt Jonach <eWarrior@electricwarrior.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Paradigm Clock Re-Set
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 07:43:06 -0800

 >>From: Stephen Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >>Message-ID: <bb.19a89832.2978a2f3@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:58:11 EST
 >>Subject: Paradigm Clock Re-Set

 >>Washington, DC - The Paradigm Clock has been reset to 11:58:00
 >>pm (two minutes to midnight)

 >>9/11/01 to 1/16/02 - The United States undergoes a
 >>significant transformation which extends to domestic and
 >>foreign posture as well as public demeanor. (>1 minute)

 >Stephen,

 >According to your assessment, we gained one minute, that is, we
 >are now closer to ET disclosure than we were last September?

 >Honestly speaking, I would have said the transformations which
 >occurred over the last few months moved the clock the other way.

 >I imagine that a Washington DC political activist, more than
 >anyone else in the UFO community, knows about the current
 >Administration's predilection for secrecy.

 >I would have thought that the Attorney General's new policy, to
 >resist access to unclassified government documents through the
 >Freedom of Information Act, hinders UFO research.

 >An Executive Order issued last November more or less confounds
 >the Presidential Records Act. It has been suggested that this
 >exercise of executive priviledge is intended to selectively
 >conceal documents from prior US administrations.

 >So, I fail to see how that bodes well for the disclosure of a
 >presumed 50 years of government secrecy with respect to
 >extraterrestrial intelligence.

(>I don't think you mind taking the input, or I wouldn't have
 >mentioned it. Assuming there is anything to disclose, I would
 >have set the clock back.)

 >-kj

Kurt,

Understandable point. This was a complex assessment. The
explanation was too long for the press release. It can be found
at:

www.paradigmclock.com/chronicleexplanations.html

Here it is:

The United States undergoes a significant transformation which
extends to domestic and foreign posture as well as public
demeanor. (> 1 minute)

A dramatic transformation takes place on many fronts. The
campaign against terrorists operating out of Afghanistan moves
quickly. Thousands of suspects, material witnesses, and others
are rounded up and detained around the world. Terrorists and
their leaders are captured. Afghanistan is liberated from
Taliban rule.

Patriotism surges within the United States, the approval level
of the President attains historic levels, trust in government as
polled increases, within the general public appreciation for the
intelligence agencies, military services and the Department of
Defense is significantly enhanced. The general public accepts
new security measures and other legal changes with little
objection.

To briefly sum a very complex dynamic, the conditions under
which formal acknowledgment of an extraterrestrial presence
might take place, from the government's perspective, become
ideal. These new conditions include the circumstance of a
Republican president very popular with the military and
intelligence community as well as strong defense/security
leaning officials at the Department of State, Vice Presidency,
CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of Justice as well as
deputy directors.

The effect is to create a window of opportunity form
approximately May 2002 to May 2003, before or after the mid-term
elections, in which the government could initiate formal
disclosure from a position of strength and control.


SB








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

               Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 11:12:37 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Mortellaro


 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 02:39:01 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'


 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:15:43 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>A commentary.

 ><snip>

 >>I've ordered the book based on the reviews I've read and knowing

<snip>

 >>To me these events (as I've said so many times before) are real.
 >>But there is the culture, the education and the intellect which
 >>says, "Hey, this stuff cannot possibly be!" There-in rests the
 >>dichotomy. There is an honest realization that these events
 >>might very well be due to infection by that methanogen Bruce
 >>Maccabee described in a recent post, or some paranormal out of
 >>body... who knows what... experience.

 >>But whatever it is, it is and will _always_ be real to me. And
 >>people who do not question their experiences, search for a
 >>truth, examine _every_ aspect of it's nature, are fooling
 >>themselves big time.

 >Hello Jim: If I may butt in here..

 >For somebody like me, having seen nothing I could really call a
 >UFO, and no abduction symptoms whatsoever, its all too easy to
 >say that its all in so-and-so's head.

 >What impresses (and mystifies) me is not only the consistency of
 >details, but the fervent emphasis that you and others have
 >expressed, on the absolute personal reality of these
 >experiences.

 >Here we have people who seem perfectly normal in every other
 >respect, with tales that just totally tax peoples ability to
 >believe.

Oh yes, I am normal. Heck, even the voices in my head are normal.
With the exception of Mo, Larry and Curly.

 >This is _not_ like religious beliefs. In religion (as I see it)
 >we have a sort of suspension of logic and reason, which enables
 >the adherent to "believe" whatever dogma suits him or her the
 >best.

Belief based on 'faith' is not belief. Many churches require you
to believe on faith, things which the church cannot explain and
therefor call, 'mysteries.' "It's a mystery, so take it on
faith, which is to say, on our word."

Not this Grippler. What I accept, I accept based on my own
intellect. (Hic) excuse me.

 >The abductees, at least the sensible ones, are searching for any
 >decent explanation at all, even a possibly psychological one.
 >That's just the opposite of taking things on faith.

Just so. The confusion exists when one says that what I say is
'doubting.' And this is anathema. It is not doubting. How may
one doubt what one _knows_ to be an event? What it is, is
looking for a valid explanation, even if this explanation
arrives at a conclusion which states that it is the undigested
beef one had for dinner. Doubtful, but possible that this is the
reason. Remotely.

 >A classical mental case may "see and hear" things that just
 >ain't there. They are extremely "real" to such a person. But!
 >You and some others just don't sound like mental cases to me,
 >even if still others do.

Hey, watch it, Bubba! Them voices in my head are real. Why just
a moment ago, Charley told me that he was... uh... well... he
hadda go pottie. I let him.

 >This leaves the reasoned non-experiencer dangling on a fence.
 >Wherein lies the reality of all this?

Which is one of the points I wear on the top of my head. To
appear to the ROW (rest of the world) as a rational human who
says that what happened is real as ice (I live up north) to the
experiencer, but acknowledges that he does not have the absolute
truth, makes much more sense to the citizen on or off the fence.
And after all, who does? Have absolute truth, I mean? When I can
bring back that 'apparent' control thingy I was once told worked
the ship (now does _that_ sound sane???) I am sure people will
say... "That mental case just made it outa balls... uh...
balsa wood!

 >I would not exclude psychiatric or psychological examination. I
 >would bet that many abductees have sought professional
 >assistance. If nothing else, the shrink can hopefully confirm
 >the presence or absence of any delusional traits.

 >If absent... then other explanations simply must be sought. I
 >would not give up hope for some sort of tangible evidence.

Personally, I was psychoanalised at age (approximately) 17, 30,
40-ish and around 50. There was only one shrink (these were
psychiatrists) I told I perceived I was an abductee. He didn't
blink an eye.

Each told me that tests revealed a better than average IQ,
adaptability, phobic (with unusual phobia based on my profiles,
in other words, the phobias did not fit the profile) but
completely sane and in fact, rather bright and with an ability
and propensity to music (I play piano on the one hand, but love
Dylan on the other), poetry and art. In general, I am quite sane
... according to the shrinks. The shrinks found nothing remotely
resembling an illness of any kind. However I have to admit that
I did not tell them about Gesundt. The hell with them, if they
can't take a joke.

 ><snip>

 >PS from LH: I see I'm not the only one who cannot spell Bruce's

 >name properly.

Yeah, but I can't spell it worse than you. Watch.... McAbbeeb...
or Macabeeber... or then there's Macccabbbebbert.

See?

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 19

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 12:16:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:29:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Friedman


 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:32:04 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:52:54 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

 ><snip>

 >>Hiya Mac,

 >>You wrote:

 >>>I heartily agree with John's take on 'Abduction In
 >>My Life' - see:

 >>>http://mactonnies.com/ufobooks.html

 >>It was yours and Katharina Wilson's earlier reviews that
 >>motivated me to put it on my 'things to do' list. Lord knows I
 >>have little time for reading now-a-days, (books anyway) but the
 >>reviews I read piqued my interest enough to encourage me to
 >>'make time' for it. That, and the fact that Bruce asked me to
 >>read it and comment on it. :)

 >>>The part of the book I had the most trouble accepting was the
 >>>narrator's ignorance of the UFO/abduction phenomenon; even if
 >>>you don't have the slightest interest in the subject, it's hard
 >>>to avoid in our media-saturated environment.

 >>Not true Mac. I knew little or nothing about 'ufology' or the
 >>details of any 'cases' going in. The revelation of my own
 >>intimate connection to the phenomenon came as a complete shock
 >>to me. Honestly, it never would have occurred to me to even
 >>consider alien abduction as a viable explanation.

 >Thanks for your perspective on this. I guess I approached
 >Maccabee's character too self-centrically. I've grown up on a
 >diet of "weird" reading material, and the idea of alien
 >intervention seems almost like a "given" to me.

 >Please note that I'm addressing the _idea_ of alien
 >intervention, not personal experience. In all probability, if I
 >had a traumatic CEIII I'd be grasping for alternative
 >explanations right and left. The "obvious" might not be so
 >obvious after all.

 >I still think Maccabee's character's vocation as a science
 >fiction writer was probably a bad choice, but I can appreciate
 >the usefulness of this as a narrative device.


Mac, perhaps you should review my 12 page 1977 MUFON Conference
paper 'Science Fiction, Science, and UFOs'. I discuss in detail
some of the very foolish anti-UFO propaganda penned by Isaac
Asimov, Ben Bova, and Arthur Clarke among others. None had
studied the evidence, all sounded irrational once one compares
their claims with the real world.

Once I went into a Science Fiction book store in Berkeley, CA. I
asked where the UFO stuff was. "We don't carry any of that
junk".

Kevin Randle is certainly to be commended for being involved
with UFO research despite being a science fiction writer.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                    Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 10:39:24 -0500
Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules


Which has nothing to do with this piece. But that's just me.

I've been trying hard to write, but the snow is heavy and the
coffee is good and, well, I have not been able to write. But a
theme continues in my head... over and over. I wish to share it
with the researchers on this list. It has to do with illnesses.
Someone I know well, someone who has been having experiences all
her life and is an expert on the subject of a well known but
little known about, syndrome referred to as post traumatic
shock, is doing significant research on the subject. Her
qualifications are Beyond Infinity (gotta plug the e-mag I am
writing for). PTS appears to be common among abductees. The
signs and symptoms of which are _very_ common and very similar
to those who suffer it from the affects of war, catastrophe and
of course, the abductee.

Among the worst are those symptoms whicsh stem from the auto
immune system. You've heard the story from me many times and are
likely to get bored when you read it again here and in the book,
as I've asked this wonderful and very knowledgeable lady to
write or allow me to use, a synopsis in a chapter. In reading
her shorts... uh... let me use a different word... I've never
even seen her shorts... in reading her documents and comparing
them with the symptoms exhibited by victims of Desert Storm,
Vietnam and temblor victims, I was shocked to see that they were
not merely similar, they were nearly identical.

I've asked our very broad minded (there I go again) neurologist
as well as our dermatologist and internist, all of whom are
aware of my experiences, and my psychiatrist, to each
investigate my symptoms and signs, and compare them with those
of others whom I've referred to them. The doctors have agreed to
see these folks at no charge, which I find interesting. Among
the small but very select group are two well known (among us)
abductees, four others who have not come out of their closets
and two quite normal people who suffer nothing at all. The group
will also include five people who are presently suffering PTS
from:

1) The WTC catastrophe

2) The 1983 Mexico City earthquake (which I believe was an 8.3)

3) The midwest floods and

4) One of the worst tornados ever to hit Alabama (which as I
    recall occured on or about 1978-ish.

Each of these are coming to New York at their own expense except
for three, for whom this poverty stricken new home owner is
footing the bill. Somebody better buy the farkina book or I am
in deep doo doo.

I shall report anything of import, in general terms, here on
UpDates. The data, if it works out, will be in the book.
Donations for the Gesundt Publishing Company are welcome. Send
them to the "First Church of the Poor Abductee Bastard," in care
of the Streets of Canal. Oh, and before I forget, make it cash.
Just wrap it carefully and the Postal (HAH!) workers will never
notice.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 13:21:45 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 10:41:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 12:16:42 -0400

<snip>

 >Mac, perhaps you should review my 12 page 1977 MUFON Conference
 >paper 'Science Fiction, Science, and UFOs'. I discuss in detail
 >some of the very foolish anti-UFO propaganda penned by Isaac
 >Asimov, Ben Bova, and Arthur Clarke among others.

I've never read anything by Bova re. UFOs, but I agree that
Asimov and Clarke's "skeptical" arguments are lame. I'm almost
able to forgive Clarke some of the time, but Asimov was
fanatical; not only did he condemn the very possibility of UFOs,
but he attempted to slaughter the reputations of scientists who
didn't agree with him (i.e. J. Allen Hynek). Reading Asimov's
anti-UFO nonsense is pretty distressing for anyone who's looked
more than an inch deep into the controversy.

 >Kevin Randle is certainly to be commended for being involved
 >with UFO research despite being a science fiction writer.

Randle is the _only_ SF writer I know of who defends the ET
hypothesis for some UFOs. Although Gregory Benford has made some
sensible suggestions for UFO research and doesn't appear to have
quite the ego-problem with it that other SF hardliners seem to.

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                       Fwd: Are You Ready For Contact?

From: Joe McGonagle <joem_cgonagle@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:18:49 -0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 10:45:45 -0500
Subject: Fwd: Are You Ready For Contact?


I saw this and thought "What a clever idea!". Don't
misunderstand me, I am not recommending that you all go out and
buy one, but the concept is simple - there will be an
unspecified charge for "the device", which I suspect will be
excessive (the "device" itself is not yet in production...)

I suspect "the device" will be a light-projector, projecting a
sequence of different coloured lights into the night sky, though
I could be wrong. If the price is not too exhorbitant, I think
many ET believers will buy one - if nothing else, it would go
down a treat at parties, and will probably generate UFO reports
of its own!


Cheers, Joe


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

From: "The Signal and Message" <lingo@thesignalandmessage.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.ufo.files
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 4:59 AM
Subject: Are you ready for contact?


Are you ready for contact? Are you ready for the information and
secrets being withheld to be opened up to the public? Could it
be possible that the reason there are so many sightings is
because the Extra Terrestrials want us to know they are here.
Could it be possible that the Extraterrestrials are waiting for
us to be ready for contact. The Signal and Message is a Device
and Process that will enable users to send a message to Extra
Terrestrials that are presently monitoring Earth and to
Governments that are presently using space technology
simultaneously.

For more information see

http://www.thesignalandmessage.com

as the device will soon be 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 11:08:21 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:15:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Fleming


 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 13:21:45 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >Randle is the _only_ SF writer I know of who defends the ET
 >hypothesis for some UFOs. Although Gregory Benford has made some
 >sensible suggestions for UFO research and doesn't appear to have
 >quite the ego-problem with it that other SF hardliners seem to.


I could be wrong about this, but I recall reading that Philip K.
Dick had a (non-hostile) interest in the UFO phenomenon and may
have even based one of his books on a personal UFO experience.
If true, that would make him unique among well-known sci-fi
writers. (Maybe Kevin Randle will someday be equally well-known
in sci-fi circles, but I don't think he's there yet, being much
better known for his Roswell books.)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                     Budd Hopkins Seminar - Feb. 2, 2002

From: Intruders Foundation <IFConfer@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 11:51:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:19:19 -0500
Subject: Budd Hopkins Seminar - Feb. 2, 2002



Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Announcement

"ARE YOU AN ABDUCTEE?"

Saturday, February 2, 2002

For our opening seminar of 2002, Budd Hopkins will present a new
version of a popular workshop he has offered in other venues
across the United States. "Are You an Abductee?" will examine in
depth the symptoms most frequently reported by men and women who
feel they may have had UFO abduction experiences but do not
consciously recall all - or even many - of the details of these
encounters. To demonstrate the issues one faces in examining
such concerns, Hopkins will read from letters he has received
from possible abductees, and, in a discussion of hypnosis, will
play dramatic segments of tape-recorded hypnotic regression
sessions he has conducted.

The purpose of this program is to examine the signs and symptoms
of buried UFO abduction cases in order to help individuals
decide for themselves whether or not to explore their possible
experiences.

For more detailed information regarding the subject matter of
this seminar, please go to the following link:
http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/if_events.html


SEMINAR REGISTRATION & INFORMATION

The seminar will be held on February 2nd at the meeting rooms of
A.R.E., on the tenth floor of 150 W. 28th Street, New York. The
price is $30 for non-members and $20 for members of IF, seniors
and students with proper identification. 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 for each seminar. On-street
parking is generally available in the neighborhood. The seminar
will begin at 7:30 p.m. and end at 10:00 p.m. Doors open at 7:00
p.m. 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.

We 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 website


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 20

                            Re: Kinross - Tenney

From: John Tenney <johntenney@mail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 02:11:07 +0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:00:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Kinross - Tenney


The F-89C that was flown by Moncla and Wilson during the Kinross
incident was plagued with problems, not their plane
specifically, but the F-89's in general.

The F-89 and was being flown that night had a non-retractable
air inlet screen on the lower engine, which (in certain
circumstances) had the problematic effect of icing over during
climb and descent. This effect was studied in detail by The
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics by Porter J.
Perkins, (Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, Ohio)
but not until July of 1958.

The F-89's were also the victims of an as yet unknown at that
time effect now recognized as Aeroelastic Effect. Which made the
wings of the plane twist and lose structural integrity during
climb and descent. This too was the topic of a a study by Hugh
L. Dryden and Dr. John E. Duberg during the Fifth General
Assembly of the Advisory Group for Aeronautical Research and
Development, again though this report wasn't released until June
of 1955, two years after the Kinross Incident. On the same day
that Pilot Moncla and  R.O. Wilson's plane vanished another
F-89C also crashed in Wisconsin, which added to some confusion
in newspaper reports.

If anyone has any questions regarding the Kinross incident I am
currently writing a comprehensive analysis of the entire event
and latter investigations.


All the best

John E.L. Tenney

--







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:22:57 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:15:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 11:08:21 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >I could be wrong about this, but I recall reading that Philip K.
 >Dick had a (non-hostile) interest in the UFO phenomenon and may
 >have even based one of his books on a personal UFO experience.
 >If true, that would make him unique among well-known sci-fi
 >writers.

As a certified Dickhead, I point you toward his mind-bending
psychothriller VALIS.

See: http://mactonnies.com/pkdbooks.html

Jacques Vallee is the only ufologist I know of that's taken on
PKD's psychedelic experiences in the context of alien contact.
Dick began a series of communications with a disembodied
intelligence he called a "Vast Active Living Intelligent
System."

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard

From: Michael Haggard <mikeh@cybertrails.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:06:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:18:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 11:08:21 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >I could be wrong about this, but I recall reading that Philip
 >K. Dick had a (non-hostile) interest in the UFO phenomenon and
 >may have even based one of his books on a personal UFO
 >experience. If true, that would make him unique among
 >well-known sci-fi writers. (Maybe Kevin Randle will someday be
 >equally well-known in sci-fi circles, but I don't think he's
 >there yet, being much better known for his Roswell books.)

P K D wrote the book Valis that suggested aliens sent him
information through a beam of light. There has been much
UFO/Conspiracy theory about the book being auto-biographical.

There is also W.A. Harrison with the books Genesis, Inception,
and Revelation dealing with the possibility that UFOs are from a
possible alien changeling who worked for the Nazis (but for his
own ends).

Then Star Trek The Next Generation and Voyager have had a few
episodes that tell the alien abduction story in a favorable (as
in advocative) light. In some the cast are the abductors and in
others the cast are abductees who face all the stresses of
modern abductees.

The field is becoming more attune to the phenomenon.


Michael The Haggard








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

              Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:30:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

* Get the popcorn out, this one's a marathon!  :)  JV

Hola Docca,

You write:

 >PTS appears to be common among abductees.

Here we go again. You make the blanket statement above as if it
had some basis in established fact.

It doesn't.

Why do I say that?

In this latest missive you appeal to "researchers" to consider
PTS as it applies to 'abductees'. Based on that statement I'd
like to ask a few pertinent questions first if I may.

1. Could you please point me to the psychological studies that
were performed on 'abductees' that arrived at the conclusion
you have cited in your comment above?

Reason for asking: PTS syndrome is a difficult diagnosis at
best. It would take extensive and long term therapy/counselling
in order to nail down the specific causes/origins of it in any
individual. In the case of an 'abductee' the complexity of the
diagnosis becomes doubled as a therapist would be hard put to
differentiate between trauma's that are related to 'normal' life
experiences and any that may be related to the 'abductions'.

It takes a long time to reach a point of familiarity with a
client that would allow such determinations to be made with any
degree of certainty. Ergo, based on your statement, a large
enough sampling of abductees would have had to undergo some form
of long term diagnostic counselling in order to pin down
'abduction' as the cause of origin for any symptomology being
attributed to  PTS.

2. Who conducted the study?

Reason for asking: It would carry more weight if those
conducting a study to determine the origin of PTS syndrome
symptoms in any individual was performed by (more than one)
mental health expert, and preferably by professionals that have
no 'preconceived' notions about UFO abduction or predilection
toward any belief system regarding same. No one to date has
conducted such a specific and detailed study. I'm curious as to
which group conducted what study that drew the conclusion you
announce in public.

3. How many 'abductees' were involved in the study and over
how long a period of time?

Reason for asking: The _number_ of participants in such a study
as well as 'who' conducted it, and under what conditions would
have _great_ bearing on the weight that any findings would
carry.

280 abductees out of say 300 would be much more compelling and
significant, carry much more weight, than say findings based on
a study of five or ten individuals by a single researcher with
no credentials. Maybe even one who may be biased one way or
another _before_ they even begin. People who conduct studies who
also have a personal aganda (something they're looking to prove)
usually find a way to justify the results they were after to
begin with. Establishing objectivity of those conducting the
study would be of paramount importance. All these factors will
contribute to how seriously the results/findings/conclusions,
should be taken.

4. How were the subjects for the study chosen? What criteria was
utilized to first 'identify' the 'abductees', and then what did
they base their final candidate selections on?

Reason for asking: How was it determined who is 'qualified' to
bea part of an 'abductee' sampling. What specific criteria was
employed to cull the 'abductees' from those who only 'think'
they are 'abductee'.  (From the 'self-proclaimed' or previously
uninvestigated cases presented for consideration.)

If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
investigation for _all_ of us.

You see, one of the things that myself and many others have been
working and fighting long and hard for is; a serious
investigation by the mainstream scientific and academic
community. Which will hopefully include _security/police_
experts as well. After all, what is being reported by so many
people from all parts of the globe is nothing short of willful
abduction/kidnap. A commonly acknowledged 'crime' in all
countries of the world.

Now someone like you comes along and makes a statement like "PTS
appears to be common among abductees," without offering or
providing one shred of substantive evidence that such a
statement is even remotely true. You (falsely) give people the
impression that your comment is based on some kind of accepted
or proven fact. I've said this a thousand times and I'll
continue to say it until the skies fall; "There have been _no_
(as in, none, nada, zippo, zero) formal studies conducted on
those who are reporting UFO/alien abduction." Period. That's
what the hell I'm out here working for year after year.

To warn others and to get the 'serious' attention of the
research community is very thing I fight the hardest for.
Instead of lending your support to get an investigation for all
of us, you seem to be working _counter_ to that common goal with
a vigor I have rarely witnessed. And all of it coming from
someone who is _never_ able to "back up" _any_ of the outrageous
statements that you make about other experiencers in very
_public_ forums. Every time you do so I am compelled to step in
and question it. Fair, honest questions. But I'll be damned if
I'm going to allow such pure speculative nonsense to go by
unchallenged.

You never once stop to consider how many you may be tarring
unjustly with your 'one size fits all' brushes. Sure, if
someone, anyone had been put through the kind of trauma that so
many of us have experienced, it would have profound
ramifications on the person and their psyche. But first you need
to establish the fact of the trauma by conducting a proper
investigation or study to determine if such a thing is true or
not. You make statements that sound like conclusions that have
been arrived at honestly by credible people conducting credible
study's. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

You can't just say anything that pops into your gripple-soaked
melon just because it happens to suit your purposes. (Whatever
wild theories and conclusions you plan to sell the public in
this often threatened "book" of yours.) A statement such as "PTS
appears to be common among abductees" needs to be backed up with
some kind of substantive study that was conducted in an above
board fashion by competent professionals. Who, as a result of
all that hard work have determined that such a thing as you
proclaim to the listening world is true.

Bottom Line:

Aside from your need to develop interest in the theories you
plan to put forth in this book of yours, we _all_ need to be
"investigated/studied." You give the false impression that
(unbiased, professionally conducted) studies which arrive at the
conclusions you state have actually been conducted.

It's not true.

 >The
 >signs and symptoms of which are _very_ common and very similar
 >to those who suffer it from the affects of war, catastrophe and
 >of course, the abductee.

Show me where and by whom this conclusion has been determined
and what it is based on Jim. Who were the researchers? Who were
the subjects? Where is the results of this study published?

 >Among the worst are those symptoms whicsh stem from the auto
 >immune system. You've heard the story from me many times and are
 >likely to get bored when you read it again here and in the book,
 >as I've asked this wonderful and very knowledgeable lady to
 >write or allow me to use, a synopsis in a chapter. In reading
 >her shorts... uh... let me use a different word... I've never
 >even seen her shorts... in reading her documents and comparing
 >them with the symptoms exhibited by victims of Desert Storm,
 >Vietnam and temblor victims, I was shocked to see that they were
 >not merely similar, they were nearly identical.

So, you know for a fact that; abductees demonstrate PTS as a
direct result of the abductions. (And are derived from nowhere
else.) ie; which part of it may come from abductions or which
parts may come from say, repeated beatings they may have endured
from an abusive parent.) b. You compare PTS symptoms from Gulf
war veterans to the symptoms exhibited by abductees as if it was
already a given that abductees (many of them according to you)
exhibit PTS symptoms that have been determined to originate with
the UFO abduction experiences. Oh, and that those 'symptoms' are
identical to war vets.

Hog-wash!

 >I've asked our very broad minded (there I go again) neurologist
 >as well as our dermatologist and internist, all of whom are
 >aware of my experiences, and my psychiatrist, to each
 >investigate my symptoms and signs, and compare them with those
 >of others whom I've referred to them.

Gee, they "share" patient information with you? What ever
happened to doctor-patient confidentiality? Wouldn't they be
breaking that trust to provide you with _any_ information that
they obtained during an examination? I would recommend to anyone
participating to; a. sue you, and b. sue the pants off the
doctors. New Cadillacs all around!

 >The doctors have agreed to
 >see these folks at no charge, which I find interesting.

So do I. The way you plan to obtain data for your book/theory is
_illegal!_

 >Among
 >the small but very select group are two well known (among us)
 >abductees, four others who have not come out of their closets
 >and two quite normal people who suffer nothing at all. The group
 >will also include five people who are presently suffering PTS
 >from:

 >1) The WTC catastrophe

 >2) The 1983 Mexico City earthquake (which I believe was an 8.3)

 >3) The midwest floods and

 >4) One of the worst tornados ever to hit Alabama (which as I
 >recall occured on or about 1978-ish.

 >Each of these are coming to New York at their own expense except
 >for three, for whom this poverty stricken new home owner is
 >footing the bill. Somebody better buy the farkina book or I am
 >in deep doo doo.

If this 5 or 6 person study you've concocted hasn't been
performed yet, how is it that you post your conclusions first?
(a. "many" abductees suffer from PTS, and b. that the
manifestation of the PTS in the abductees is the same as that
manifested by Gulf war veterans.) Both scientifically and
ufologically speaking, you're so out of touch with reality that
it would take an interstellar rescue mission to retrieve you.

 >I shall report anything of import, in general terms, here on
 >UpDates. The data, if it works out, will be in the book.
 >Donations for the Gesundt Publishing Company are welcome.

Oh, I can't wait. BTW, the check is in the mail!  ;)

 >Send
 >them to the "First Church of the Poor Abductee Bastard," in care
 >of the Streets of Canal. Oh, and before I forget, make it cash.
 >Just wrap it carefully and the Postal (HAH!) workers will never
 >notice.

Yeah, cash, right. Gotcha.


John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:25:45 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:31:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:02:28 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Well, I respectfully disagree. I, nor anybody else, on the
 >outside see anything anomalous, much less a significant portion.
 >What I see are some confused people working off false
 >assumptions. Unfortunately it didn't burn itself out and instead
 >kept growing. Now it's an article in the MUFON Journal. The
 >Rawin was never a Rawin -- it's the real saucer debris. (I'm
 >sure I hear Dennis Stacy giggling somewhere in the background.)

 >Enough is enough! It's become embarrassing.

David,

I can't admit to not finding a moment of guarded chortling re.
the above, true. Rorschach will only take you so far, after all.

You might want to keep that in mind while performing your own
Rorschach reading of the Ramey teletype. This could be extremely
important, I admit, but so far Randle and Friedman don't seem to
share your interpretation of same. Or perhaps they do? And what
about RPIT?


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

              Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap'

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 13:28:23 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:33:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap'


The Cydonian Imperative
1-20-02

Lan Fleming Indentifies MOLA "Mishap" (Guest
commentary)

http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html

[The following is posted with permission of Lan
Fleming of SPSR. --M.T.]

Hoagland's latest article on the use and misuse of MOLA data,
which references my own, gives a link to a little-known NASA web
page that displays the MOLA profiles for a selected area of
Mars:

http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/MOLA/regions/05_35/

I've attached a jpeg showing the position of the Face, the D&M,
and a large crater crossed by one of the tracks on this web
page. On the right, the multicolored profile is displayed on the
web page for the selected track. The white inset with the red
profile is the one I generated independently using numerical
data from the online MOLA database of coordinates and
elevations. You can see that the two profiles are the same
because the heights and spacing of all the peaks match exactly
on both the NASA profile and the one I made. (The elevation
scale is greatly exaggerated relative to the distance scale in
both). Even the little squiggles match exactly.

[image]

Screen-capture showing Fleming's reproduction of MOLA
results.

Notice that the Face is actually to the left of the track and
that the corresponding peak on the profile is displaced a few
pixels above the Face. This is also true for the D&M and for the
crater rim indicated. This is important in understanding what
the mistake was that Garvin may have made.

If you go to this web page and click on the "Show all tracks"
button, it appears that there are actually two tracks that cross
the Face, but this isn't so. The coordinates of the peaks on the
two profiles that appear to cross over the Face are about 0.2
degrees apart in latitude, or about 10 kilometers. (There is a
coordinate display at the bottom of the web page when the mouse
pointer is dragged over a point on the displayed profile). The
Face is only 2.5 kilometers long, so one or the other profile
doesn't cross the Face. The one I chose is track #10061 (in the
MOLA database, it was labeled #10062). I know I chose the
correct one because the elevation map I constructed had a much
higher resolution than the NASA web page image of the area, and
I could see that there was no alternative that matched the
position of the Face in the wide-angle optical image. Taking
into account the displacements of the traks on the NASA web
page, it confirms that I chose the right profile.

I now think Garvin (or somebody) chose the profile that crosses
the mesa ten kilometers almost directly to the south of the Face
and mistook it for the Face. [emphasis added] This is track
#10929 on the NASA web page. This mesa is roughly 250 meters
high relative to the surrounding planes -- close to the 800-foot
height cited in the NASA article. From the shadows in the Viking
images, you can clearly see that this mesa is not nearly as high
as the Face. I think Garvin may have looked at the NASA web page
and mistakenly assumed that the profiles were displaced downward
on the page rather than upward. [emphasis added]

So basically, this looks like it might have been a dumb mistake
of the type we all make, especially when dealing with the sort
of trivial nuisance that I'm sure Garvin views the Face to be.
But if NASA lets this error stand without the correction
afforded the amount of media publicity that was given to the
original erroneous NASA article in May, I would consider it
anything but trivial. The MOLA data was the basis for the entire
JPL debunking campaign, and they simply got it wrong. [emphasis
added]

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                 Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 17:53:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:43:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Sandow


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:22:57 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 11:08:21 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >>From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 ><snip>

 >>I could be wrong about this, but I recall reading that Philip K.
 >>Dick had a (non-hostile) interest in the UFO phenomenon and may
 >>have even based one of his books on a personal UFO experience.
 >>If true, that would make him unique among well-known sci-fi
 >>writers


Dick, I've read, was generally a skeptic on the paranormal,
including UFO reports.

On the other hand, he did have paranormal experiences,
especially the one he describes in "Valis," where a beam of
purple light (if I remember the color correctly) told him about
a potentially fatal illness his young son had, which no doctor
had diagnosed. Dick insisted tests be done, and the child indeed
had the condition.

Dick thought he received messages of some kind from some
non-earthly entity. Or maybe it's better to say he received
information not from earth. An entity - in the sense of an alien
or, God help us, transdimensional being, or whatever we'd like
to imagine -- might not have been involved, as he understood
things. I heard about this at great length from him before he
died, and, again, it's in 'Valis' (though written as fiction).
(We never talked about UFOs the two times we met, so I have no
direct idea what his views were.)

Two other science fiction writers with some kind of UFO
connection:

Patricia Anthony, a real gem of a writer, uses a lot of UFO lore
in her books. Her novel "Brother Termite" imagines what might
happen if the abduction aliens -- the same ones we meet in
hundreds of abductee reports-- take over. She also wrote "God's
Fires," my favorite of her books, about an alien visit during
the time of the Portugeuse inquisition. There's a hilarious
passage where skeptics from the church hierarchy debunk a
farmer's sighting. It's obvious that Anthony has read current
UFO debates, and is writing a parody of today's skeptics.

Thomas M. Disch (the librettist of two of my operas) is no
longer especially known as a science fiction writer, having
outgrown the field and joined the ranks of general literature.
But he got his start in science fiction (along with the likes of
Samuel Delany, he was one of the main American "new wave"
writers of the late '60s and early '70s). He's a notable UFO
skeptic. When Strieber's "Communion" first came out, Tom wrote a
derisive review in The Nation, which was widely quoted at the
time.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 20:34:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:45:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee


 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:32:04 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:52:54 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'

 ><snip>

 >>Hiya Mac,

 >>You wrote:

 >>>I heartily agree with John's take on 'Abduction In
 >>My Life' - see:

 >>>http://mactonnies.com/ufobooks.html

<snip>

 >Thanks for your perspective on this. I guess I approached
 >Maccabee's character too self-centrically. I've grown up on a
 >diet of "weird" reading material, and the idea of alien
 >intervention seems almost like a "given" to me.

 >Please note that I'm addressing the _idea_ of alien
 >intervention, not personal experience. In all probability, if I
 >had a traumatic CEIII I'd be grasping for alternative
 >explanations right and left. The "obvious" might not be so
 >obvious after all.

 >I still think Maccabee's character's vocation as a science
 >fiction writer was probably a bad choice, but I can appreciate
 >the usefulness of this as a narrative device.

The main character is not only a science fiction writer; he is
portrayed as a scientifically trained technologist. But most
importantly, he is portrayed as very skeptical. Since science
fiction writers tend to be skeptical of UFO sightings, etc., I
decided to characterize the main character as a science fictiion
writer as well as a technologist.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                         Who Is The Mothman Expert?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:03:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:03:30 -0500
Subject: Who Is The Mothman Expert?

http://www.portland.com/audience/stories/020120mothman.shtml


Sunday, January 20, 2002

Schlock Therapist

By RAY ROUTHIER, Portland Press Herald
Writer


Loren Coleman was just 12 when he was drawn to his life's work.
It happened when he saw a schlocky 1958 horror movie called
"Half Human," about an abominable snowman terrorizing the
Japanese countryside.

The movie was a certified flop, but it started Coleman down a
40-year path of trying to document and analyze the many human
sightings of things as weird as, or weirder, than abominable
snowmen. While most of us scoff or snicker at such things, the
premise of "Half-Human" caused Coleman to make a serious study
of such reported creatures as the Loch Ness Monster, Sasquatch
and Mothman.

So maybe it's appropriate that Coleman, who is 54 and lives in
Portland, is getting a heavy dose of national attention these
days. It turns out that after years of studying things that most
of us laugh about, Coleman's expertise is being sought after by
the mainstream media including radio stations, magazines,
documentary film crews and movie producers.

"The Mothman Prophecies," a Sony/Screen Gems film starring
Richard Gere and set for national release Friday, is based on
sightings of a 6 1/2 to 7-foot-high winged creature in Point
Pleasant, W. Va., in 1966 and 1967. The sightings came just
before a bridge collapse in that town, which killed 47 people
and led to speculation about paranormal activity.

The producers and the media have turned to Coleman repeatedly as
one of the few experts on Point Pleasant's Mothman and other
Mothman-like sightings in recent history. It helps that his
latest book, "Mothman and Other Curious Encounters," (Paraview
Press, $14.95) was released earlier this month.

"In researching the subject, his was a name that kept coming
up," said David Grabias, the maker of the documentary "Search
for Mothman," which premieres Wednesday on the FX cable network,
and will likely be shown again. "It's a story where it's hard to
find people who are authoritative and credible and somewhat
objective, and that's why I turned to Loren."

Coleman lives a sort of double life. He's known in Maine for his
work as a consultant to school systems and health care
organizations in the areas of teen suicide and youth violence.
He did research in those areas for the Muskie School of Public
Service at the University of Southern Maine until recently, and
now does his work as a private consultant. It's this work that
pays his bills.

But Coleman is also a nationally-known researcher and author in
the field of cryptozoology, the study of unknown or undiscovered
animals. Outside of other people who are interested in
cryptozoology, not many people are familiar with Coleman's work,
or cryptozoology itself, for that matter.

Enter "The Mothman Prophecies," which has been advertised on TV,
in magazines and at the movie theaters. Because the media has a
huge appetite for movie hype, Coleman has gone from an
investigator of fables (in the minds of many) to a bona fide
expert - all in a Hollywood minute.

Coleman, while not formally hired by Sony/Screen Gems, has done
more than 40 radio and magazine interviews as part of the
current "Mothman" publicity frenzy. He appeared at a news
conference in Hollywood, and is featured prominently in the
documentary, which Sony helped to make.

The movie is actually based on a book of the same name by John
Keel, a friend of Coleman's who went to Point Pleasant shortly
after the first Mothman sightings. Keel has been interviewed as
well for various "Mothman Prophecies" publicity pieces.

Coleman's book differs from Keel's in that Coleman is not as
interested as Keel in theories of UFOs or paranormal activity.
Coleman says he he is first and foremost a cryptozoologist, so
his book is more about the earthly possibilities behind what
people saw, or might have seen, in Point Pleasant.

He has documented the facts of the sightings, and interviewed
the people who saw something, in a methodical, journalistic way.

"He's really the foremost expert on Mothman next to John Keel,"
said Marc Weinstock, vice president of marketing for Sony/Screen
Gems. "He knows the story and he can speak to it well. Because
of that, he's being sought out for interviews."

So what exactly is Mothman? Well, from talking to people who say
they saw it in Point Pleasant, it is a black creature with red
eyes, the size of a large man, with wings. The drawing on
Coleman's "Mothman" book, made from witness descriptions, looks
like a giant black owl with cape-like wings.

Coleman says he had been working on a Mothman book for years,
but decided to finish it when the movie publicity started coming
out. The book, "Mothman and Other Curious Encounters" came out
in early January and is available only by ordering at book
stores or online.

In the book, Coleman writes about the Point Pleasant sightings,
which began in November of 1966 and lasted for 13 months. Some
people in the small town on the Ohio border simply said they saw
it, either standing still or flying. Others say they felt its
presence. Others reported premonitions of some impending
disaster. In his book, Coleman lists the details of 26 specific
sightings of Mothman or a similar creature during 1966 and 1967
in the small town.

Then on Dec. 15, 1967, Silver Bridge in Point Pleasant collapsed
during end of the day rush-hour, and 47 people were killed. The
bridge collapse happened at a time when bridges were not
inspected regularly, and Coleman said there were engineers who
explained structurally what had worn out inside the bridge (an
eye-bar pin) and why it had collapsed. So the bridge collapse
itself isn't that mysterious, though the Mothman sightings
leading up to it are.

Coleman concentrated his book on putting Mothman in context,
such as talking about other sightings of giant winged creatures
over the years. These so-called Mothman sightings, Native
American sightings of "thunderbirds" and other evidence may
point to some giant bird that hasn't been discovered yet,
Coleman thinks.

What Coleman doesn't do in his book is to focus on the UFO and
paranormal speculation that plays a large part in the "Mothman"
movie.

"In all my investigations over the years I've found that 80
percent of these are misidentifications or hoaxes, but there are
some with at least a kernel of truth," said Coleman, sitting in
the work room of his apartment, just a few blocks from USM. The
room is filled with skulls, monster models and other creature
clutter. "What I try to do with any of these is present data,
and if you present enough data, there might be some acceptance
of what happened."

As for Mothman, all Coleman can say for sure is that many people
say they saw something like a large winged creature. And that
there are at least some similarities between their descriptions
and various descriptions of other sightings recorded in
newspaper accounts over the years, as well as descriptions from
people Coleman has interviewed.

"This is only the second book on Mothman, and what I wanted to
do is reclaim him for cryptozoology," Coleman said.

That being said, Coleman lacks hard proof that Mothman exists,
which is the basic knock many scientists have on cryptozoology.

In the field of cryptozoology however, Coleman is well respected
for his meticulous research of sightings and for his analysis
and perspective.

He has written several other books on the subject, including
"Mysterious America" (Paraview, 2001) and "Cryptozoology A to Z:
The Encyclopedia of Loch Monsters, Sasquatch, Chupacabras, and
Other Authentic Mysteries of Nature" (Simon & Schuster) 1999,
with Jerome Clark.

"I think everyone has to read a Loren Coleman book if they are
going to be involved in cryptozoology. He's very well
respected," said George Eberhart, senior editor of American
Libraries Magazine and the author of a forthcoming book on
cryptozoology.

Coleman admits that he spends more time on cryptozoology, which
doesn't exactly pay much, than he does on his consulting work.
Being regarded as a Mothman expert hasn't made him richer, but
it has gotten some publicity for his book.

It also has made his cryptozoology seem cooler to his sons -
Malcolm, 15, and Caleb, 11. After all, their dad has now written
a book about something that is being made into a Hollywood
movie.

But for Coleman, the best thing about the "Mothman Prophecies"
movies is that it may do for others what the horrible John
Carradine movie "Half Human" did for him.

"I hope that because of the movie and my book, Mothman will
resurface as an important cryptozoological subject," said
Coleman. "Like Big Foot or Loch Ness."

Staff Writer Ray Routhier can be contacted at 791-6454 or at:

rrouthier@pressherald.com

Copyright =A9 2002 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.

[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:18:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:55:26 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >Neil Morris wrote:

 >>In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >>Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >>Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >>involved

 >Although I have tried to be polite, there are some things that
 >just annoy the hell out of me and this is one of them. Please
 >remember that I hadn't named any of the members of RPIT to whom
 >I had sent tapes. Neil volunteered this information himself and
 >then suggested that we, meaning Dr. Johnson and I, should
 >attempt to settle this matter. Oh, I have tried, for more than
 >ten years, ever since Dr. Johnson decided that he had seen the
 >real debris and that General Ramey didn't know what he had when
 >Dr. Johnson arrived at the office.

 >For those of you tired of this debate, please punch out now. For
 >the rest of you, I pose a single question to Neil. Having heard
 >my tapes, having seen the correspondence between Dr. Johnson and
 >me, just where have I misrepresented anything in this long and
 >rather tiresome debate?

Kevin,

Why are you having a pop at me over this?, I'm merely a
bystander not a combatant.

And as far as I'm aware I've not mentioned "misrepresentation".

 >Dr. Johnson alleges that I called him cold, giving neither the
 >time to prepare for the interview nor the opportunity to refresh
 >his memory concerning the events of July, 1947. I sent to Neil,
 >as I have to the others who asked, a letter from Betsy Hudon at
 >UTA who first told me that someone else had just been in contact
 >with their archives,  looking up the same photographs that

<snip>

 >During that conversation, he told me that Ramey had told him it
 >was a weather balloon and that he had taken just two
 >photographs. (Here is a point in which Neil wins something...
 >Dr. Johnson remembered just two photographs, but conceded that
 >the Marcel photograph looked as if he, Dr. Johnson, had taken
 >it. I think we all agree that Dr. Johnson took six photographs
 >and I don't hold it against him that his memory failed on this
 >point.)

Didn't you have had red flags popping up here, surely this is a
big indicator as to the safety of the rest of Bond's testimony?.

As I've said in the past (a number of times) I think Bond's
story (and I hope he might agree with this) is nothing more than
a collection of vague impressions, I personally would not like
to tag any recalled conversations from them as being accurate as
you seem to have done.

I've treated Bond's story in that light, but events in parts of
it have been corroborated now by a third party in the ST offices
that evening and throughout the night after Bond left, he's
given us additional background details of the night's events
unknown to Bond.

<snip>


 >He has decided that he photographed real debris from a crashed
 >flying saucer, all in the face of other testimony that suggests
 >there was nothing in General Ramey's office when Johnson entered
 >other than a weather balloon and rawin target. It is clear from
 >the statements made by General DuBose, Major Marcel and WO
 >Newton that the debris was a weather balloon. The evidence is in
 >the photographs for all to see. Clearly this is a weather
 >balloon and rawin target and nothing else... which might explain
 >the RPIT desire to cling to Dr. Johnson's discredited testimony
 >about what was in General Ramey's office. Without it, we are
 >left with only a weather balloon and degraded target. The
 >silence from those in the RPIT who had heard the tapes, who have
 >copies of the tapes, and who had spoken to Dr. Johnson is
 >deafening. I think they believed what Dr. Johnson said about me
 >and the recordings... until they heard them for themselves and
 >realized that Dr. Johnson's take on the situation just wasn't
 >reflected in reality.

Kevin.

Can I say here, and I hope this goes for all the RPIT team.

THE RPIT's conclusions are _not_ based on Bond Johnson's
testimony but on the analysis of the pictures he took together
with other archive material from the time.

In fact what Bond did or did not say is totally irrelevant as
far as the work with the FW pictures is concerned, and the
identity of the person who took them in no way reflects on what
they recorded.

I would hope we are both agreed that what we see in the them is
a true record of events at some point during that afternoon?,
and as such is far more accurate than any 40-50 year old
memories.

 >My point here is that Neil has the tapes, has the letters and
 >has other supporting documentation. Rather than deal with it, he
 >ignores it, suggesting that Dr. Johnson and I work out the
 >differences. I have tried and hoped that those on the RPIT who
 >should have more influence with Dr. Johnson could get some of
 >the answers. The question that remains is why have they been so
 >quiet on this point? Why won't they admit the truth?

???Why am _I_ expected to deal with _your_ differences with a
3rd party???

I really don't see where you're coming from here.

As I've tried to outline, Bond's testimony is _not_ what the
RPIT's research is about, and frankly at the end of the day is
that testimony crucial to the scheme of things?. IMHO no, I for
one am happy to put it to one side until some, all or none is
corroborated, at the moment some of it has.


Much can still be gleaned about that afternoon without any
reference to it, just from the archived material, and it's
interesting to reflect on how this might relate to the FW pics.

We have a few _firm_ time reference points in the story, one is
when the whole media who-har started, that is agreed as the
first AP wire release at 3.26pm Fort Worth time (I'll use FW
time throughout) was sent out to the network. Another firm time
we have is a phone call placed to FWAAF's Maj Edwin Kirton by
the Dallas Morning News at 5.30pm. At this time Kirton gives the
DMN the weather balloon cover story, so we know the cover story
was actually in place an hour _before_ the AP's 6.30pm Irving
Newton ID story.

What was happening in that 2 hours up to the 5.30pm phone call
though?.

It seems that a great "change of mind" or the "cover story"
happened but not before some _none_ cover story reports went out
that paint a different picture.

In fact if we wind back the clock just over 30 minutes to 4.53pm
the AP ran a piece datelined Washington which quoted Ramey
saying "the _disk_ has been sent to Wright Field", note _not_
the balloon.

We have a further quote which must have been obtained before
that 5.30pm cover story cutoff point, the quote is from the very
same Maj Edwin Kirton who at 5.30pm was giving the balloon cover
story to the DMN.

He gave Reuters News Service the following direct quote from
Ramey.

The Reuters report reads:
-----
Before Brigadier General Rameys broadcast Major Edwin Kirtan,
duty officer at Eighth Air Force headquarters at Fort Worth,
quoted him as saying "it looks like a hexagonal object covered
with tinfoil or other shining material suspended from a balloon
of about twenty feet in diameter. It is possibly a weather
balloon flown at the highest altitude but none of the army men
at this base recognize it as an army type balloon."

-----

The astute will notice that the description is almost the same
wording as the 6.12pm FBI teletype, this is not surprising as it
was Maj Kirton who phoned the FBI and gave them that
information. And it also, to me, clarifies a little the twist in
the tail of the FBI teletype.

The FBI agent writes referring to the FWAAF's belief in the
debris being a balloon as had been suggested:

"telephonic conversation between their office and Wright Field
HAD NOT BORNE OUT THIS BELIEF"...

and later he confirms Ramey's earlier statement quoted from the
Washington source:

..."Disc and balloon being transported to Wright Field by
special plane for examination..."

The above Reuters quote clearly tells us that though the debris
_had_ been examined there at FWAAF, _none_ of the staff there
could identify it. And though it _looked_ like balloon/target
material note how the use of "tinfoil" is qualified by "or other
shining material".

I find it impossible to believe FWAAF would not be able to
identify "tinfoil" but here we have a direct quote from Ramey
saying they _could_ _not_, I find it impossible to believe FWAAF
would not be able to identify a neoprene weather balloon but
here we have a direct quote from Ramey saying they _could_
_not_.

If they suspected it as balloon and target debris why not just
run down to the stores and get one to compare it with?.

For all the debris "resembled" that of a weather balloon, and
that solution seems to have been floated at an early stage, when
it came to the crunch as the FBI teletype spells out:

"telephonic conversation between their office and Wright Field
HAD NOT BORNE OUT THIS BELIEF"

In plain language the debris might have looked like a wrecked
balloon and target but when they examined it in detail _and_
conferring with Wright Field home of the AAF's technical bods,
they had concluded _it_ _wasn't_.


So what have we got in the FW pictures?...debris that looks like
a weather balloon and radar target? ...sure....

But what happens when we look closely at the debris, what do we
find?.

We find some of that debris that couldn't possibly be from a
weather balloon and target, this additionally confirmed now by
measurements of the debris, measurements that check out as 98%
accurate on test articles of known size within the photographs.

If it looks like a duck _and_ quacks like a duck, then it most
probably is a duck.

But conversely,

The debris in the photographs might look like an ML307 and
balloon _but_ some of it has "bells and whistles" it shouldn't
have, and some of it's measurements don't fit.


In conclusion, we therefore appear to have a period sometime
after 3.26pm when FWAAF seems have been giving out a straight
story and openly cooperating with press inquires, and without
any hint of a security matter in sight. Could we speculate on
this early, apparently open cooperation with the press being
extended to an acting Star Telegram photographer taking some
pictures?, Ramey did not seem to have any problem about Reuters
being told they didn't know what the heck the debris was, and
having gone that far verbally, was there reason then to stop a
photographer taking it's picture too?.

Have we given FWAAF far too much credit in knowing just what was
happening, particularly early on that afternoon?. After all
FWAAF was at the end of a very extended, and at the NM end
tenuous, communications chain starting 60+ miles out in the
desert.


Neil










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                        Alfred's Odd Observation #005

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 06:49:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:20:48 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Observation #005


Alfred's Odd Observation #005 (Monday - January 21, 2002)

The only thing I can report on this iteration is that Jupiter is
almost one twelfth of its way around its current orbit, but the
skies are otherwise dead.  Oh, I've seen birds, bolides and
balloons, airplanes and ancillaries, and other things that one
suspects _should_ be up there, but nothing like those *things*
inspiring this current series of odd observations.  No strangely
moving night lights silently crawling the night sky like glowing
beetles...

Nothing...

So - I've included in this issue the Brahms of Ufology, Dr. J.
Allen Hynek, in a Foreword he wrote for another serious work
exploring the reality of this *thing* that interests us all so
much.  Apparently we're not the only ones interested.  And given
the facts?  The reader can bet that someone is interested -
somebody knows, Hynek thinly hints...

Allen Hynek, remember, maintained (throughout his association
with this touchy subject) the highest caliber of respect,
appreciation, and acknowledged integrity as is possible for a
man of science to achieve.  His words are not to be taken
lightly, shallowly considered, or disregarded.  He was in at the
ground floor of the anomalous with few others and what he says
today is every bit as important, factual and truthful as it was
almost forty years ago... Read on!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FOREWORD to Jacques and Janine Vallee's 'Challenge to Science:
The UFO Enigma'

By J.ALLEN HYNEK - Chairman, Department of Astronomy, and
Director, Dearborn Observatory, Northwestern University


WHAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE Scientist confronted with
observations that seem not only a challenge but sometimes also
an affront to science? How does one discharge this
responsibility? The UFO phenomenon presents us with such a
problem. To most scientists who have no acquaintance with the
subject, save that gained from scanning the popular press, it is
an "untouchable" area. "Flying saucers" indeed - the product of
immature, imaginative, and even unbalanced, minds the playground
of the pseudo-scientist and the quasi-mystic, the haven of the
crackpot.

Is this really so? Obviously, if one is to apply the scientific
principles we all staunchly defend, one must take the time to
look into the subject carefully, to look, and to consider. But
time is precisely what today's scientists, in some respects the
world's busiest people, do not have! Who can take the time to
wade through the seeming morass of stories, fanciful tales,
chimera, and balderdash when so many pressing things demand the
scientist's immediate attention? As an astronomer, I probably
would never have approached the subject had I not been
officially asked to do so. Over the past eighteen years I have
acted as a scientific consultant to the U.S. Air Force on the
subject of unidentified flying objects - UFOs. As a consequence
of my work on the voluminous Air Force files and, to a greater
extent, on personal investigation of many puzzling cases and
interviews with witnesses of good repute, I have long been aware
that the subject of UFOs could not be dismissed as mere
nonsense. Nonsense is present, to be sure, and misidentification
of otherwise familiar objects that many sincere people report as
UFO's.

But is there not a "signal" in the "noise," a needle in the
haystack? Is it not precisely our role to try to isolate the
valid from the nonsensical. By carefully working through tons of
pitchblende, Madame Curie isolated a tiny amount of radium, but
the significance of that minute quantity was world- shaking.

It is my conclusion (speaking now personally and not in an
official capacity) after many years of working through "tons" of
reports, that there is a signal, that there is "radium" in the
"pitchblende," waiting to be extracted. The authors of this book
have come to the same conclusion, by a somewhat different path.
Whether the scientifically valid in the entire UFO phenomenon
proves to be a physical signal or a psychological one   oz even
a heretofore unknown phenomenon   it is in every respect a
challenge to science.

Perhaps I should have spoken earlier; eighteen years is a long
time. But it takes more evidence to get an idea accepted in a
revolutionary field, be it biological evolution, relativity, or
quantum mechanics, than it does to advance simply another step
in an accepted scientific domain. Furthermore, astronomers are
among the most conservative of scientists. Perhaps this is
because their time scale is so great that they naturally bide
their time in proposing or accepting revolutionary ideas,
particularly if such ideas are subject to sensational treatment
in the press and in the minds of the people.

Nonetheless, I have of late been rebuked, in my correspondence
with people whose integrity I respect, with the charge that I
failed to call the importance of the air force data on UFO's to
the attention of my peers. If any defense is needed, in view of
the controversial and explosive nature of the subject, it is
that I did indeed on many occasions call guarded attention to
the steadily growing mass of reports made by intelligent people
from many countries.

As early as 1952, before the Optical Society of America I
pointed out the significant nature of some types of UFO reports
(article published in the Journal of the Optical Society of
America, April, 1953). Over and above that, there remains the
fact that for years I have personally devoted a portion of my
time to this subject, an action that would be unthinkable had I
not felt it was worthy of examination. I have long been aware
that the UFO phenomenon is a global one and that it has captured
the attention of many rational people. Numerous scientists have
privately told me of their interest and their willingness to
look further into the problem.

Also, as a scientific consultant to the U.S. Air Force, I carry
a unique responsibility: any statement I make on the importance
of the UFO phenomenon, unless backed by overwhelming evidence,
carries the danger of "mobilizing the credulity of the world,"
as a university colleague of mine so aptly put it. I recognize
that responsibility in accepting the invitation of the authors
to write the Foreword to this book. It was only my respect for
the authors as serious investigators and the continued and
growing mass of unexplained UFO reports that prompted me to
accept. I have over the years acquired something of a reputation
as a "debunker" of UFO reports. If this arose from my honest
desire to find a rational natural explanation for the stimuli
that give rise to the reports, a procedure very frequently
crowned with success, then I must bear with that reputation. If
it stems, however, from a belief that I deliberately adopted a
Procrustean approach, cutting down or stretching out evidence to
make a forced fit, deliberately to "explain away" UFO reports at
all cost, then it is a most unwarranted charge.

In my nearly two score years' association with the investigation
of the reports, I have yet to write a book on the subject,
primarily because there is no physical evidence in support of
the phenomenon Were I to write such a book today, however, I
probably would take much the same approach followed by the
present authors. The Vallee's present a formidable amount of
evidence for the global nature of the UFO phenomenon, but
despite this they come to no firm conclusion. As they state: "We
must realize that the observations we have reviewed... have no
value in themselves. They are important, and deserve study, only
because each one is an illustration of a phenomenon that has
manifested itself since May, 1946, in every country in the
world." Besides the fact that the reports bear striking
similarities to each other, they continue to be made by people
of good repute, which makes it imperative that a scientific
investigation be undertaken. Because of the global nature of the
total phenomenon this investigation might well be carried out
under the auspices of the United Nations. The psychological
implications of the UFO phenomenon on world affairs certainly
make it worthy of study. It makes no difference, in this
respect, what the physical truth of the matter is; it is the
impact it has on the minds of people in many nations that makes
it potentially important in the psycho-sociological balance of
the world.

My own interest, as an astronomer, in the total phenomenon is,
of course, purely scientific Some readers many well wonder
whether this seemingly flamboyant subject is amenable to
scientific inquiry. What constitutes scientific evidence in this
field The authors present a convincing argument that the UFO
phenomenon can be studied with the advanced methods of inquiry
of the physical scientist and of the sociologist and
psychologist. In all of these methods the electronic computer
figures prominently.

Scientific inquiry becomes possible when the phenomenon under
study exhibits patterns and regularities, when it is subject to
classification. The authors have  shown that a classification
system (the start of many branches of science) of UFO phenomena
is possible and, indeed, that each type they have identified
shows a different diurnal frequency pattern. In particular,
their catalogue of five hundred cases should be of interest to
scientists. I cannot help drawing a parallel with the first
catalogues of celestial radio sources: the great majority of the
entries were unidentified optically; only more advanced methods
of analysis and observation revealed that some of these were
distant radio galaxies and that some were the striking new
puzzle, quasi-stellar sources. The present catalogue of UFO
cases consists, with very few exceptions of unidentified items;
one wonders whether the parallel with the catalogue of radio
sources continues.

Certainly no progress can be made without scientific study.
Unfortunately, as the authors point out, scientists, "draped
with dignity," have often refused to study the reports. The fact
of the matter is that many of my colleagues who have draped
their dignity long enough to take a hard look at the reports
have joined the growing ranks of the puzzled scientists: they
privately indicate serious interest in the phenomenon but
publicly they choose, like the subject itself, to remain
unidentified; they are unwilling to expose themselves to the
raillery and banter that go with it. It is to them in
particular, and to all who faster the true Galilean spirit, that
this book will be of greatest value. They grope and seek,
examining even those ideas that seem fanciful and strange, for
they know haw strange and fanciful the term "nuclear energy"
would have been to a physicist one hundred years ago. They are
ready to accept a new challenge to science.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Almost 40 years have passed since this was written, and
sometimes I feel as if I'm the only one ready to accept that new
challenge... you?  Read on!


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                          Life - In Space And Time

From: Joe McGonagle <joem_cgonagle@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:15:19 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:22:27 -0500
Subject: Life - In Space And Time


The following is a short extract from a nature science article
at:

http://www.nature.com/nsu/020114/020114-7.html

[main title: Life, As It Was In The Beginning?]

---

Life - in space and time

Biologists have speculated for many years that hydrogen-powered
ecosystems could exist beneath the ground. The methanogen
community suggests they were right, says astronomer and
astrobiologist Richard Taylor of the Probability Research Group
in London.

---

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

              Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap'

From: Joe McGonagle <joem_cgonagle@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:46:22 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:23:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap'


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 13:28:23 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 01-20-02 - MOLA 'Mishap'
 >To: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>

 >The Cydonian Imperative
 >1-20-02

<snip>

Well done, Mac, I really did appreciate this article,


Joe McGonagle









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

             Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 09:20:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:29:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


Jim:

This one is extremely interesting, at least to me, probaby many
others to boot.

 >4. How were the subjects for the study chosen? What criteria was
 >utilized to first 'identify' the 'abductees', and then what did
 >they base their final candidate selections on?>

 >Reason for asking: How was it determined who is 'qualified' to
 >be a part of an 'abductee' sampling. What specific criteria was
 >employed to cull the 'abductees' from those who only 'think'
 >they are 'abductee'. (From the 'self-proclaimed' or previously
 >uninvestigated cases presented for consideration.)

 >If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
 >quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
 >preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
 >of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
 >what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
 >blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
 >investigation for _all_ of us.


This, to me, is the most important of all. Without a viable
control, with bonafide abductees, and a control unit, nothing
else would matter. It would be like going down a road, anywhere
in the world, and asking questions of anyone you meet. No
control, except an assumption.

Jean M.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                 Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:52:41 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:01:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 09:20:44 -0700
 >From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Jim:

 >This one is extremely interesting, at least to me, probaby many
 >others to boot.

 >>4. How were the subjects for the study chosen? What criteria was
 >>utilized to first 'identify' the 'abductees', and then what did
 >>they base their final candidate selections on?>

 >>Reason for asking: How was it determined who is 'qualified' to
 >>be a part of an 'abductee' sampling. What specific criteria was
 >>employed to cull the 'abductees' from those who only 'think'
 >>they are 'abductee'. (From the 'self-proclaimed' or previously
 >>uninvestigated cases presented for consideration.)

 >>If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
 >>quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
 >>preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
 >>of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
 >>what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
 >>blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
 >>investigation for _all_ of us.

 >This, to me, is the most important of all. Without a viable
 >control, with bonafide abductees, and a control unit, nothing
 >else would matter. It would be like going down a road, anywhere
 >in the world, and asking questions of anyone you meet. No
 >control, except an assumption.

 >Jean M.

Yes, I agree. However you must appreciate something. When in the
history of this conundrum, have so many doctors in one medical
group or even in any independent practice, agreed to such a
study?

In this group are psychiatrists, dermatologist, dental surgeons,
internists, gastroenterologists, cardiovascular, cardiac,
surgeons, and most of the other specialists you can think of.

I will live by their rules to begin the project. These are not a
bunch of morons who do this in a haphazard way. They will make
some general conculsions and go from there.

This is the (I pray) the beginning of a project which could be
of great merit. I would be grateful for support at this time,
rather than instant disgust with it, already noted.

I can assure that all the valid questions will be answered and
appreciate everyone's concern. Stick with it, wish us luck and
don't judge yet. It is only the (again I pray) beginning.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:15:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:04:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Maccabee


 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 13:21:45 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >>Kevin Randle is certainly to be commended for being involved
 >>with UFO research despite being a science fiction writer.

 >Randle is the _only_ SF writer I know of who defends the ET
 >hypothesis for some UFOs. Although Gregory Benford has made some
 >sensible suggestions for UFO research and doesn't appear to have
 >quite the ego-problem with it that other SF hardliners seem to.

Since my book is fiction, except the part that is science, and
since it is set in the future (the action in the book commences
in the fall of 2002 and ends in 2005) it could be called science
fiction. So I guess I could be called a "science fiction writer"
in a small way, who supports the OI (Other Intrelligences)
hypothesis for UFOs.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                         Re: Weekly Briefing 1.21.02

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:54:11 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:06:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Weekly Briefing 1.21.02


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

January 21, 2002

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
1.21.02


Life, As it Was in the Beginning?
http://www.nature.com/nsu/020114/020114-7.html

Bizarre Creature in Idaho Raises Prospects for Life on Mars
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/life_methane_020116.html

Newly Discovered Antarctic Microbes Suggest Life is Possible in Terrains on=

Mars
http://uanews.opi.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/WebObjects/UANews.woa/wa/SRStoryDetail=

s?ArticleID=3D4736

Antarctic Find Boosts Prospects for Mars Life
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/15/antarctic.life/index.html

Here's the Drill: Mars's Greatest Treasures May Lie Beneath it's Barren,
Icy Surface
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/drill_mars_020117.html

Finding Challenges Assumptions of Mars Meteorite, Planet Formation
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/carbonate_water_020116.htm=
l

Cydonian Imperative: MOLA "Mishap"
http://www.geocities.com/macbot/imperative26.html

Lowly Yabby Could Claw its Way to Mars
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/16/mars.crayfish/index.html

Listening For an Ocean on Europa
http://www.onr.navy.mil/onr/newsrel/to0109.htm#ocean

Galileo Bids Adieu to Io, Preps for Fatal Plunge
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/17/galileo.io/index.html

Asteroid Duo Zips by Planet
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/16/asteroid.pair/index.html

How Social Science Deciphers Our Thoughts on Alien Life
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_survey_020117.html

New Study: Quantum Leap in Understanding Gravity
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/quantum_gravity_020117.=

html

Dark Energy: Astronomers Still 'Clueless' About Mystery Force Pushing
Galaxies Apart
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/cosmic_darknrg_020115-1.html

Atlanta Test-Drives the 'Segway' Transporter
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/ptech/01/15/segway.sales/index.html


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project,
providing the latest news, reports and updates, including
the Weekly Briefing, sent free to your e-mail.

To subscribe, send an e-mail with Subscribe Eras News
in the subject line to:
psa@look.ca

The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies project
focusing on 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.

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

=A9 The Eras Project, 2002











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

              Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@ebicom.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:06:57 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:10:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Felder


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Here we go again. You make the blanket statement above as if it
 >had some basis in established fact.

 >It doesn't.

 >Why do I say that?

 >In this latest missive you appeal to "researchers" to consider
 >PTS as it applies to 'abductees'. Based on that statement I'd
 >like to ask a few pertinent questions first if I may.

 >1. Could you please point me to the psychological studies that
 >were performed on 'abductees' that arrived at the conclusion
 >you have cited in your comment above?


Could you please point me to the studies/analysis/data that
proves these reported "abductions" to be a physical reality?
If there is no such evidence, then your blanket statements
categorizing people as "abductees" have no basis in fact.

True, people report "abduction experiences" but the reporting
doesn't qualify as cold, hard fact that is backed up by cold,
hard data collected from cold, hard studies on physical
evidence to support the claims made.

A quick websearch turned up over 200 references to PTSD
and claims of alien abduction. Here is a sampling:

http://www.opus-net.org/cc%20-%20disc%20of%20ea%20experiences.htm

http://azlweb01.allianzlife.com/imgate.nsf/fa81717ba5b21c9a062565a900793161/
5dee8bd2bf7a23b006256613001307ff?OpenDocument

http://www.gsb.columbia.edu/faculty/rfisman/CULTURAL.pdf

There would appear to be some basis for statements linking
PTSD with claims of alien abduction. "The Docca's" blanket
statement would appear to be supported, at least to a degree,
by studies/research done.


Bobbie



"The level of civilization of a people can be judged by the
  social position of its women." - Domingo Sarmiento

==========
Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
--->backwoods of Mississippi
--->USA
--->planet Earth
--->somewhere in the Cosmos
www.jilain.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

               EW: NASA's Mars Odyssey to Study 'Face on Mars'

From: The Electric Warrior - Jonach <eWarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:44:55 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:12:39 -0500
Subject: EW: NASA's Mars Odyssey to Study 'Face on Mars'


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

The Electric Warrior : Weblog January 18, 2002
http://www.electricwarrior.com

NASA's Mars Odyssey to Study 'Face on Mars'

------------------------------------------------------------
=BB NASA'S MARS ODYSSEY TO STUDY 'FACE on MARS'

=BB image 2001 Mars Face
http://www.electricwarrior.com/mol/2001MarsFaceThumb.jpg

10-Jan-02
Mars Odyssey Ready to Tackle Science Agenda
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/odyssey_update_020121.html

NASA=92s Mars Odyssey is ready to start science duties as it
circles the Red Planet... "We=92ve got a number of other
high-priority targets that are of great interest to people in
general," Saunders said. Those include the top of Olympus Mons,
Valles Marineris, and the so-called "Face on Mars" -- a site that
some claim to be of artificial nature..... "We=92re going to try
to cover all that in the first month or so, and release the data
immediately=85and just get it out there," Saunders told SPACE.com.

------------------------------------------------------------
THE ELECTRIC WARRIOR
January 18, 2002
Silicon Valley, CA
http://www.electricwarrior.com

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

              Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:28:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:22:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Velez


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 09:20:44 -0700
 >From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Jim:

 >This one is extremely interesting, at least to me, probaby many
 >others to boot.

 >>4. How were the subjects for the study chosen? What criteria was
 >>utilized to first 'identify' the 'abductees', and then what did
 >>they base their final candidate selections on?>

 >>Reason for asking: How was it determined who is 'qualified' to
 >>be a part of an 'abductee' sampling. What specific criteria was
 >>employed to cull the 'abductees' from those who only 'think'
 >>they are 'abductee'. (From the 'self-proclaimed' or previously
 >>uninvestigated cases presented for consideration.)

 >>If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
 >>quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
 >>preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
 >>of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
 >>what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
 >>blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
 >>investigation for _all_ of us.

 >This, to me, is the most important of all. Without a viable
 >control, with bonafide abductees, and a control unit, nothing
 >else would matter. It would be like going down a road, anywhere
 >in the world, and asking questions of anyone you meet. No
 >control, except an assumption.


Hiya Jean,

No doubt my post will be recieved as a personal attack. However,
if rank amateurs like you and me can see the obvious faults and
pick Mortellaro's 'folly' apart so easily, imagine what trained
scientists and skeptics will do with it!

"Doing things right" especially anything to connected to the
investigation of abduction reports is a real sticking point with
me. (For obvious reasons) My own input comes from the need to
insure that _anything_ connected to testing or investigating of
abductees is handled/carried out as thoughtfully and as
competently as humanly possible. If we expect others to take us
seriously, we sure as hell better take ourselves seriously. At
least in _public_ anyway. Privately we can laugh at our own
misfortunes for the healing therapy it provides all we want to.
In the public arena, we have some deadly serious business to
conduct with the 'People'.

When one of us plays the fool in public it makes us all look
like fools. I go out of my way to conduct myself and my business
in public according to the highest standards that I can set for
myself. Setting the bar higher than my own reach forces me to
grow and to learn. It also enhances my performance when I'm out
in public wearing my 'abductee' hat. I do so mostly because I am
acutely aware that other abductees are being judged by
whomever is reading my chicken scratches, (to a certain extent)
and by whatever comes out of me. As an individual case that has
been publicly presented (by Budd Hopkins as an example of an
"abductee,") I have always considered that public role to be a
sacred trust and one that is charged with responsibility to
others. I keep it simple, I tell only the truth of what has
happened to me, and I do it in as honest and open a way as I
can. Being thought of as "funny" or "witty" is the farthest
thing from my mind. (And my purpose in participating in a public
forum.)

All those who report UFO abduction experiences are in need of
help and a serious investigation. _That_ should be the (united)
goal and focus for any experiencers that participate (make their
voices heard) on these public e-mail Lists. 'Clowns' who want
laughs or who crave affection should try cultivating intimate
interpersonal relationships in the real world as opposed to
impersonal ones over the Internet that lack the intimacy and
commitment of face to face interactions.

As abductees we face a monumental challenge. One that requires
seriousness, dedication, and unity of purpose. The kind of
'cowboy' pseudo-science that Mortellaro proposes doesn't help us
one bit. In fact, it hurts us much more than it helps. But then,
as evidenced by his posts, I think Jim is much more concerned
with his standing in our little community as a (at times) barely
comprehensible comic buffoon than he is about how seriously
people take him as a self-diagnosed/self-proclaimed abductee.
This is a UFO List. I sometimes get the distinct impression that
he meant to sign on to Comedy.com and just got the URL wrong.

Thanx for the input Jean. We need to maintain our focus and to
continue to demand respect from the public along with a proper
investigation. No second best for us. We are ignored crime
victims. (kidnapped)

We deserve only the very best after all the sh*t we've been
through at the hands of the bugs, as well as at the hands of our
own fellow-creatures. As abductees, we get _banged_ on both
ends! Time to get serious and settle down to the monumental work
before us. I enjoy a giggle as much as the next guy. But...
ourselves, our family's and most importantly our children are
involved in this mess. We can all sit around and laugh/yuk it up
later. :)


Warm regards,

John Velez










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                 Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:54:36 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:34:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >* Get the popcorn out, this one's a marathon! :) JV

 >Hola Docca,

 >You write:

 >>PTS appears to be common among abductees.

 >Here we go again. You make the blanket statement above as if it
 >had some basis in established fact.

No, I say that abductees _do_ suffer many of the symptoms of
PTSD. And a book by that expert I spoke of, draws the same
conclusions. The purpose of this early _start_ is to demonstrate
or disprove this "blanket statement."

Get it? I wish to have all the experts in the medical field now
made available to me... to us... make that decision.

Instead of being positive, cooperative and of demonstrating
suggestions, you immediately launch into your usual rant, just
because it is me. This is not in consort with the kind of
positive involvement which you claim to embrace. Which is
telling.

 >It doesn't.

 >Why do I say that?

 >In this latest missive you appeal to "researchers" to consider
 >PTS as it applies to 'abductees'. Based on that statement I'd
 >like to ask a few pertinent questions first if I may.

Ask away, however I've asked nothing of researchers, except to
look at the opinions of physicians, the very same physicians you
have been asking to study this subject for a long, long time.
Why now, do you object based on nothing. Nothing.

Why? Because nothing has yet been done. That is the purpose of
this study. You object to that? Then I question your sincerity
and your motives for calling yourself an advocate.

 >1. Could you please point me to the psychological studies that
 >were performed on 'abductees' that arrived at the conclusion
 >you have cited in your comment above?

No, can you? Which is why this is being done. Not only by
psychologists, but by physicians and specialists. Now, what the
hell is wrong with your picture?

 >Reason for asking: PTS syndrome is a difficult diagnosis at
 >best. It would take extensive and long term therapy/counselling
 >in order to nail down the specific causes/origins of it in any
 >individual. In the case of an 'abductee' the complexity of the
 >diagnosis becomes doubled as a therapist would be hard put to
 >differentiate between trauma's that are related to 'normal'
 >life experiences and any that may be related to the
 >'abductions'.

Partly true. However, when was the last time someone was able to
gather together an _entire_ medical group of physicians with
which to begin such a study? And this study is exactly what you
ask above. Hopefully if preliminary results indicate even a
small relationship, the rest of what you ask will be
accomplished.

I ask again, what the hell is your problem with obtaining
exactly what you are asking for? And when did this ever happen
before? Never!

No one, not even you, has been able to do such a thing, let
alone begin such a thing. Perhaps if it had been you who was
able to begin such an exciting study, by recognized physicians
(voted the best medical group in the state), the idea would
really be a "dust bunny and a half," eh?

 >It takes a long time to reach a point of familiarity with a
 >client that would allow such determinations to be made with any
 >degree of certainty. Ergo, based on your statement, a large
 >enough sampling of abductees would have had to undergo some
 >form of long term diagnostic counselling in order to pin down
 >'abduction' as the cause of origin for any symptomology being
 >attributed to PTS.

And I presume that you, Sir, are an expert in this area? Not.
And even if you were, what the hell difference does this make to
the fact that my doctor, who has known be for 35 years, has
taken it upon himself and his associates, to attempt something
like this. It is (I pray) just the beginning. So live with it.
Long term? Maybe. We shall see what they have to say. No one has
_ever_ gotten even this far. So what the hell are you objecting
to? Nothing. For what you ask, shall be (I pray) determined.

 >2. Who conducted the study?

 >Reason for asking: It would carry more weight if those
 >conducting a study to determine the origin of PTS syndrome
 >symptoms in any individual was performed by (more than one)
 >mental health expert, and preferably by professionals that have
 >no 'preconceived' notions about UFO abduction or predilection
 >toward any belief system regarding same. No one to date has
 >conducted such a specific and detailed study. I'm curious as to
 >which group conducted what study that drew the conclusion you
 >announce in public.

I'm curious why you make such a ridiculous statement. This is an
exciting development never before attempted. And there _are_
experts who've already agreed to make a start and draw some
preliminary data with which to decide to go further. Live with
that too. And I suppose that you are not paying attention again.
The purpose of this preliminary study is to determine EXACTLY
what you ask for. So again, what the hell is your problem?

 >3. How many 'abductees' were involved in the study and over
 >how long a period of time?

 >Reason for asking: The _number_ of participants in such a study
 >as well as 'who' conducted it, and under what conditions would
 >have _great_ bearing on the weight that any findings would
 >carry.

 >280 abductees out of say 300 would be much more compelling and
 >significant, carry much more weight, than say findings based on
 >a study of five or ten individuals by a single researcher with
 >no credentials. Maybe even one who may be biased one way or
 >another _before_ they even begin. People who conduct studies who
 >also have a personal aganda (something they're looking to prove)
 >usually find a way to justify the results they were after to
 >begin with. Establishing objectivity of those conducting the
 >study would be of paramount importance. All these factors will
 >contribute to how seriously the results/findings/conclusions,
 >should be taken.

One small step for abductees. One giant leap for the research. I
shall let the experts determine sample size. And when did you
become an expert in statistical analysis? This is not a formal
study, it is a preliminary one. When has this even been
attempted before, let alone accomplished? List the times. Let me
know why you object to a beginning. This is gonna be a feast for
this list if you do.

 >4. How were the subjects for the study chosen? What criteria was
 >utilized to first 'identify' the 'abductees', and then what did
 >they base their final candidate selections on?

None of anyone's business, not at this time.

Reason: Preserving the identity and personal information of the
small group. And, this is merely the start. Hello? Is your
computer working?

 >Reason for asking: How was it determined who is 'qualified' to
 >bea part of an 'abductee' sampling. What specific criteria was
 >employed to cull the 'abductees' from those who only 'think'
 >they are 'abductee'. (From the 'self-proclaimed' or previously
 >uninvestigated cases presented for consideration.)

You. As you know _some_ of these abductees and have acknowledged
(in the past) their legitimacy insofar as your opinion is
concerned.

 >If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
 >quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
 >preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
 >of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
 >what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
 >blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
 >investigation for _all_ of us.

Frankly my dear, I just don't give a damn. Why? Because nothing
is sweeping at all. It's a start. A beginning. Hello? Is your
computer working? How about your intellect?

The only serious impediment to this project is your negativity.
You really have a serious problem. Think about my first
statements. When in the history of this conundrum, has such a
study _ever_ been started. However small. And the preliminary
results of these dedicated men and women (the physicians) will
determine if the project continues. As they will determine
sample size, select candidates with the help of researchers whom
you and I respect. You object to something you know nothing
about. Sit tight and let me do my thing. We may all learn
something. Even you.

 >You see, one of the things that myself and many others have been
 >working and fighting long and hard for is; a serious
 >investigation by the mainstream scientific and academic
 >community. Which will hopefully include _security/police_
 >experts as well. After all, what is being reported by so many
 >people from all parts of the globe is nothing short of willful
 >abduction/kidnap. A commonly acknowledged 'crime' in all
 >countries of the world.

Fine. Go gather together a group of law enforcement people, and
do the same thing that I am doing. Start a project in lieu of
contradicting something which is exactly what you've been asking
for for years. A staff of medico's who are determined to learn
something, which is more than I can say about your opinions
stated here.

But since it is _me_ who does it, it is a disservice to God, the
Universe, Humanity and the abductee, whom you've worked so hard
to protect.

Grow up. The green-eyes of that monster of the same name is
showing on your right shoulder. It should be on your left one.

 >Now someone like you comes along and makes a statement like "PTS
 >appears to be common among abductees," without offering or
 >providing one shred of substantive evidence that such a
 >statement is even remotely true. You (falsely) give people the
 >impression that your comment is based on some kind of accepted
 >or proven fact. I've said this a thousand times and I'll
 >continue to say it until the skies fall; "There have been _no_
 >(as in, none, nada, zippo, zero) formal studies conducted on
 >those who are reporting UFO/alien abduction." Period. That's
 >what the hell I'm out here working for year after year.

Which is the purpose of this study. Hello? Is your computer
working. What the hell is the matter with you? Can't you read?

In a book now being prepared, as I've already said, the
connection to PTSD is being established. Because I have access
to the shorts makes me a little more knowledgeable than you. So
why bother to rant when you have no knowledge of this subject
and the studies being made? And this book is the basis for the
study being done. Excerpts from it were one of the reasons for
the doctors' decision.

 >To warn others and to get the 'serious' attention of the
 >research community is very thing I fight the hardest for.
 >Instead of lending your support to get an investigation for all
 >of us, you seem to be working _counter_ to that common goal with
 >a vigor I have rarely witnessed. And all of it coming from
 >someone who is _never_ able to "back up" _any_ of the outrageous
 >statements that you make about other experiencers in very
 >_public_ forums. Every time you do so I am compelled to step in
 >and question it. Fair, honest questions. But I'll be damned if
 >I'm going to allow such pure speculative nonsense to go by
 >unchallenged.

I really care not one whit whether you challenge it or not, for
in the final analysis, everything you say is purely based on
your own personal dislike for me and anything I do or say. You
debase a project of great potential merit at the very beginning.

I've warned no one. I've not countered anything. Except your
personal dislike for me. As for backing up... what the hell is
it that I am attempting to do. Duh! Back up or deny a theory.
You seem to have a problem with that. Or is it me you have
a problem with. And I've never made a claim about anything
I could not back up. I _have_ made a good deal of opinions
on this list. You have too.

In fact, you debased your misunderstood comments about my
doubting my experiences. You confuse the word you used, "doubt"
with the word I use, investigate. Seek. And yet, with all of
your words on that subject, you admitted on Strange Days...
Indeed, that we should be investigating the truth of this
conundrum. You even admitted that it could be something other
than real. Woof! Do you have a problem or do you have a problem.

Perhaps I should 'do my homework' and tell the Docs to forget
the entire project because you think it's my project and the
experts' project and because you think I've already made up my
mind and have told everyone it's true while in reality, it is
something I am attempting to prove _or_ disprove.

Hello? Is your computer working?

Because it is _they,_ the experts, who will make all the
decisions. Not me. It is they, who will select candidates based
on the best sampling I could come up with. And they are
relatively well known cases. As I've said, even you know some of
them.

 >You never once stop to consider how many you may be tarring
 >unjustly with your 'one size fits all' brushes. Sure, if

I never said anything of the kind. You just did.

 >someone, anyone had been put through the kind of trauma that so
 >many of us have experienced, it would have profound
 >ramifications on the person and their psyche. But first you need
 >to establish the fact of the trauma by conducting a proper
 >investigation or study to determine if such a thing is true or
 >not.

Which is the purpose of the study. Duh!

 >You make statements that sound like conclusions that have
 >been arrived at honestly by credible people conducting credible
 >study's. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Which is the purpose of the study. Duh!

The purpose of the study is to attempt to establish this
connection. Are you paying attention?

 >You can't just say anything that pops into your gripple-soaked
 >melon just because it happens to suit your purposes. (Whatever
 >wild theories and conclusions you plan to sell the public in
 >this often threatened "book" of yours.) A statement such as "PTS
 >appears to be common among abductees" needs to be backed up with
 >some kind of substantive study that was conducted in an above
 >board fashion by competent professionals. Who, as a result of
 >all that hard work have determined that such a thing as you
 >proclaim to the listening world is true.

I object to your insulting reference of me as a "Gripple-soaked
melon." It is demeaning. Perhaps that is what you intended?

This is the substantive study. Woof! You are not paying
attention. Sir, you are personally involved in so much angst
that you cannot see that the point of this start, this
beginning, is to do just what you suggest above.

I hope that you begin to see the light. And further, I am not
really interested in your opinions. Because they are not
relevant, valid or accurate. They are in fact, highly flavored
with your anger with me. And further, the project is not Velez'.
It is the 'Docca'. That makes it, ipso facto, devoid of any
merit.

 >Bottom Line:

 >Aside from your need to develop interest in the theories you
 >plan to put forth in this book of yours, we _all_ need to be
 >"investigated/studied." You give the false impression that
 >(unbiased, professionally conducted) studies which arrive at the
 >conclusions you state have actually been conducted.

I do not. You do. What a stupid remark. The purpose is to do the
investigation. I won't make the decisions, the experts will. I
am not pushing anything. I am pushing the investigation, the
study. You are pushing. And way too far I must say.

And I expect that the study will reveal such as you've written.
Yes. So?

"This book of mine."

"That book of yours."

Are you listening to yourself? If that is not bias, then John,
you need to look in the mirror and take stock of your inventory
of what is valid and what is highly charged with personal angst,
if not a high degree of someone stealing your fire.

 >It's not true.

It sure is.

 >>The
 >>signs and symptoms of which are _very_ common and very similar
 >>to those who suffer it from the affects of war, catastrophe and
 >>of course, the abductee.

 >Show me where and by whom this conclusion has been determined
 >and what it is based on Jim. Who were the researchers? Who were
 >the subjects? Where is the results of this study published?

Again ... _Duh!_ This is the purpose of the study. HELLO?

 >>Among the worst are those symptoms whicsh stem from the auto
 >>immune system. You've heard the story from me many times and are
 >>likely to get bored when you read it again here and in the book,
 >>as I've asked this wonderful and very knowledgeable lady to
 >>write or allow me to use, a synopsis in a chapter. In reading
 >>her shorts... uh... let me use a different word... I've never
 >>even seen her shorts... in reading her documents and comparing
 >>them with the symptoms exhibited by victims of Desert Storm,
 >>Vietnam and temblor victims, I was shocked to see that they were
 >>not merely similar, they were nearly identical.

 >So, you know for a fact that; abductees demonstrate PTS as a
 >direct result of the abductions. (And are derived from nowhere
 >else.) ie; which part of it may come from abductions or which
 >parts may come from say, repeated beatings they may have endured
 >from an abusive parent.) b. You compare PTS symptoms from Gulf
 >war veterans to the symptoms exhibited by abductees as if it was
 >already a given that abductees (many of them according to you)
 >exhibit PTS symptoms that have been determined to originate with
 >the UFO abduction experiences. Oh, and that those 'symptoms' are
 >identical to war vets.

 >Hog-wash!

I agree. Your statements and lack of sensibility in my case, to
be objective, is revealing.

And it is spelled, "Hogwash!"

 >>I've asked our very broad minded (there I go again) neurologist
 >>as well as our dermatologist and internist, all of whom are
 >>aware of my experiences, and my psychiatrist, to each
 >>investigate my symptoms and signs, and compare them with those
 >>of others whom I've referred to them.

 >Gee, they "share" patient information with you? What ever
 >happened to doctor-patient confidentiality? Wouldn't they be
 >breaking that trust to provide you with _any_ information that
 >they obtained during an examination? I would recommend to anyone
 >participating to; a. sue you, and b. sue the pants off the
 >doctors. New Cadillacs all around!

Share the results with me? Not the individual case history, most
of which I know anyway. Where is it written that I will be
looking at individual data? Huh? Oh, I got it. In your mind!

And feel free to sue me.

 >>The doctors have agreed to
 >>see these folks at no charge, which I find interesting.

 >So do I. The way you plan to obtain data for your book/theory is
 >_illegal!_

Wow. And I suppose you carry the word, "Esquire" at the end of
your other titles? I've already cleared this with my and the
medical group's attorneys. DUH!

 >>Among
 >>the small but very select group are two well known (among us)
 >>abductees, four others who have not come out of their closets
 >>and two quite normal people who suffer nothing at all. The group
 >>will also include five people who are presently suffering PTS
 >>from:

 >>1) The WTC catastrophe

 >>2) The 1983 Mexico City earthquake (which I believe was an 8.3)

 >>3) The midwest floods and

 >>4) One of the worst tornados ever to hit Alabama (which as I
 >>recall occured on or about 1978-ish.

 >>Each of these are coming to New York at their own expense except
 >>for three, for whom this poverty stricken new home owner is
 >>footing the bill. Somebody better buy the farkina book or I am
 >>in deep doo doo.

 >If this 5 or 6 person study you've concocted hasn't been
 >performed yet, how is it that you post your conclusions first?
 >(a. "many" abductees suffer from PTS, and b. that the
 >manifestation of the PTS in the abductees is the same as that
 >manifested by Gulf war veterans.) Both scientifically and
 >ufologically speaking, you're so out of touch with reality that
 >it would take an interstellar rescue mission to retrieve you.

 >>I shall report anything of import, in general terms, here on
 >>UpDates. The data, if it works out, will be in the book.
 >>Donations for the Gesundt Publishing Company are welcome.

 >Oh, I can't wait. BTW, the check is in the mail! ;)

<snip>

 >right. Gotcha.

No, you don't. Which is your personal addiction. To cast
aspersions at every turn at anything I do. Like it or not, John,
you are not a faithful servant of this research as you say you
are.

Now that I've repeated myself by repeating your repeating
yourself, I should warn you, I am going to now take a Prilosec.
You've given me a case of agida. As usual.

Tell you what, Velez, _YOU_ make the selection. Howzzat? You
decide who should be examined. Howzzat?

You run the study with my doctors' group. Howzzat? Make you feel
better? Go ahead. Take it over. Or lighten up and leave it
alone, leave it to the experts.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

             Philip K. Dick [was: Review: Abduction in My Life]

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:09:01 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:39:27 -0500
Subject: Philip K. Dick [was: Review: Abduction in My Life]


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 17:53:40 -0500

<snip>

 >On the other hand, he did have paranormal experiences,
 >especially the one he describes in "Valis," where a beam of
 >purple light (if I remember the color correctly)

Pink, I'm pretty sure...

 >told him about a potentially fatal illness his young son had,
 >which no doctor had diagnosed. Dick insisted tests be done, and
 >the child indeed had the condition.

 >Dick thought he received messages of some kind from some
 >non-earthly entity. Or maybe it's better to say he received
 >information not from earth. An entity - in the sense of an alien
 >or, God help us, transdimensional being, or whatever we'd like
 >to imagine -- might not have been involved, as he understood
 >things. I heard about this at great length from him before he
 >died, and, again, it's in 'Valis' (though written as fiction).
 >(We never talked about UFOs the two times we met, so I have no
 >direct idea what his views were.)

As PKD is one of my main inspirations, let me say "wow."  You're
the first person I've encountered who actually met Dick, not
counting K.W. Jeter.

 >Patricia Anthony, a real gem of a writer, uses a lot of UFO
 >lore in her books. Her novel "Brother Termite" imagines what
 >might happen if the abduction aliens - the same ones we meet
 >in hundreds of abductee reports - take over.

'Brother Termite' is a delicious read. And it's going to be a
movie called Citizen Termite'.

 >Thomas M. Disch (the librettist of two of my operas) is no
 >longer especially known as a science fiction writer, having
 >outgrown the field and joined the ranks of general literature.

"Outgrown" science fiction?  Those are fighting words, dude. :)



=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:16:49 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:49:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Tonnies


 >From: Michael Haggard <mikeh@cybertrails.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:06:46 -0700

<snip>

 >P K D wrote the book Valis that suggested aliens sent him
 >information through a beam of light. There has been much
 >UFO/Conspiracy theory about the book being auto-biographical.

Having read his collected writings, I don't see any
"conspiracy". 'Valis' was an admittedly autobiographical novel
and even contained bits of Dick's nonfiction 'Exegesis'.

 >There is also W.A. Harrison

Harbinson, actually...

 >with the books Genesis, Inception, and Revelation dealing with
 >the possibility that UFOs are from a possible alien changeling
 >who worked for the Nazis (but for his >own ends).

The mastermind/bad guy in Harbinson's UFO novels wasn't an
alien; he was a genius earthling who'd managed to postpone death
through cybernetics. Harbinson's scenario is that the entirety
of the modern UFO phenomenon can be explained by the experiments
of an eccentric and amoral genius.

I've got the gist of this theory catalogued at:

http://mactonnies.com/whosthere.html


--Mac









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 21

                 Re: Who Is The Mothman Expert? - Rutkowski

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:31:18 -0600 (CST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:52:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Who Is The Mothman Expert? - Rutkowski


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:03:30 -0500
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Who Is The Mothman Expert?

With all due respect to Messrs Coleman and Keel, I would like to
suggest that a third book might be most closely related to the
upcoming movie.

The Silver Bridge, by Gray Barker, published by Saucerian Press
(1970) is a quirky, wide-eyed, surreal and vivid description of
Barker's investigations of the Point Pleasant and Clarksburg
sightings of Mothman, UFOs and the "prophecies" to which the
reference is made. I have always enjoyed Keel's Mothman
Prophecies, and rank it prominently as one of the most important
and influential UFO books published to date. Keel's approach
involved detailing many other related and seemingly-unrelated
cases from around the world, boiling them down to enhance the
eerie string of phenomena he found as he travelled through the
area, interviewing witnesses.

But Barker's original book on the Point Pleasant weirdness, with
its sensational style and fantastic prose (he himself considered
the book 'poetry') seems more aligned with what we will see on
screen when the movie opens this week.

As a Fortean, however, I look forward to adding Loren's book to
my library soon!


Nobody in particular








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                  PRG Press Release - EXTRA Award - 1/21/02

From: Stephen G. Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 01:00:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:01:29 -0500
Subject: PRG Press Release - EXTRA Award - 1/21/02


PRG
Paradigm Research Group

January 21, 2002

Press Release - PRG EXTRA Award
Attn: News, Internet Editor/Reviewer/Webmaster

Washington, DC - Paradigm Research Group has given an EXTRA to a
websites addressing the field of UFO/ET research/activism.
Receiving in the research category is The Black Vault
(www.theblackvault.com). The award is accompanied by a $1000
grant.

The EXTRA is designed around Joe Tucciarone's expansive painting
(http://members.aol.com/INTERSTELL/art.html) Genesis and is
called the Extraterrestrial Phenomena Research Award - EXTRA.
This and past awards and reviews are located at
www.paradigmclock.com/extra_award.html.

The purpose of the EXTRA is to raise the awareness of the media
and public toward the quality and professionalism of websites
devoted to extraterrestrial phenomena research and activism. The
public perception is that the UFO presence on the Internet is
silly, casual, and poor in quality.  Nothing could be further
from the truth.  The effort put into these websites is often
extraordinary.  Every kind of web publishing technology is
utilized, and all serious and important aspects of the work are
richly represented.

      January 2002 EXTRA Winner for Research

      The Black Vault - www.theblackvault.com
      Publisher: John Greenewald, Jr.
      Webmaster: John Greenewald, Jr.
      Motto: "Exposing the Truth. Period."

Review

The Black Vault began in 1996 as a project of John Greenewald,
Jr. when he was a high school student and quickly became the
largest repository of FOIA documents pertaining to UFO/ET
phenomena in the world. Many of these documents were obtained by
FOIA requests submitted by Greenewald, himself. John is now a
private researcher and has not only stayed the course, he has
grown the site to literally massive proportions, including FOIA
documents for a number of other areas of public interest. It is
the view of Paradigm Research Group the Black Vault is one of
the most important websites on the internet and should
eventually receive substantial institutional support as a
national resource.

The Paradigm Research Group is a lobbying/consulting project
serving the interests of UFO/ET research/activist organizations
around the country. It is dedicated to ending the government
imposed embargo of the truth of an extraterrestrial presence and
the convening of open, comprehensive congressional hearings to
take the testimony of government witnesses as regards UFO/ET
events and evidence.

Contacts: The Black Vault: John Greenewald, Jr. -
         818-886-0131- john@greenewald.com
         Paradigm Research Group: Stephen Bassett
   __________________________________________________

              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
   ___________________________________________________

     "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
         if you are willing to give away the credit."
   ___________________________________________________

           "Intellectual passion is found at the
           intersection of fact and implication."







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:04:43 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:04:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads


 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:19:42 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >>>You assert that Roswell AAFB would have Rawins - implying that
 >>>they would be familiar with the device and its uses. In July
 >>>1947, Roswell did not have any ground-based radars. Indeed, in
 >>>order to practice radar counter-measures, the 509th had to beg
 >>>time from either the White Sands or Alamogordo radars.

 >>I'm not sure this is quite right. They did request the use of
 >>ground-based radars at other facilities, but that seemed to be
 >>for the diversification of their practice bombing runs rather
 >>than a lack of ground-based radars at RAAF. There were several
 >>types of mobile radars and some of those assigned to the base in
 >>1947 have suggested that such radars were in place. I have found
 >>documentation that places ground-based radars at Roswell in the
 >>late summer of 1947 and there were radar technicians assigned to
 >>the base throughout 1947. This search continues.

 >This is from a memo to the Commanding Officer of White Sands
 >from Capt. Frye of the 8th Army HQ, at Ft Worth on July 3rd,
 >1947.

 >'There is a lack of ground radar equipment convenient to Eighth
 >Air Force Bases which are located at Forth Worth, Texas, Tucson,
 >Arizona, and Roswell, New Mexico; and since White Sands is
 >easily within easy flying distance of all three bases, your
 >cooperation is particularly desirable.'

 >Note that the Air Base at Roswell is specifically mentioned. If,
 >as you speculate, diversification was desired, the three bases
 >would simply have flown against each other's radars. If Roswell
 >was the only one of the three that had a radar, then Ft Worth
 >and Tucson would have utilized that system. But, it can be
 >easily seen that this was not the case, and we have here the 8th
 >Army trying to beg time from the White Sands people.

While the above is persuasive, I think the key word here is
convenient which does not preclude ground based radars in
Roswell (or the other locations) only that the radars would be
used for other purposes such as GCA approaches. However, I have
no direct evidence of this, only hints found in the unit
histories and the base newspaper. I think I can establish the
installation of a ground based radar in late July or early
August, but this really does nothing to support my side.

I will also note that "lack of ground radar equipment
convenient" is not the same as an absence of ground radar
equipment. I believe that the door is open here, though not very
wide.

I have also found references to the SCR-584 radars in and around
the Roswell area in the right time frame. As you know, these
were mobile and the support for them probably would have
accompanied them.

<snip>

 >I should also point out that most ground radars of the era were
 >mobile, including the one at White Sands. My guess is that your
 >sources are understandably a bit fuzzy as to exactly when Radars
 >were first introduced at the Roswell base. The memo quoted above
 >seems to be the only authority that can conclusively answer that
 >question.

It doesn't conclusively answer the question but suggests there
were no radars that were convenient for their use. Training
requirements might have tied up the radars longer than could be
allowed given the other missions. I still continue to search for
the definitive answer, realizing that it is very difficult to
prove a negative.

<snip>

 >>>Given this, it is highly unlikely that anyone at RAAFB would require
 >>>the use of a Rawin, let alone have one laying around. Besides,
 >>>Rawins would not be of any use to a bomber wing- their primary
 >>>military use is for artillery units.

 >>Ah, but I think you missed my point which was they were also
 >>used in atomic testing such as Operation Crossroads, which the
 >>509th and the 1st ATU participated in. The 1st ATU supplied the
 >>logistical support which means that the materials were staged
 >>and flown out of Roswell and in those equipment packages would
 >>have been weather balloons and Rawin targets. All equipment that
 >>was not used was eventually returned to Roswell, so in this
 >>case, it can be suggested that the balloons and targets could be
 >>found in Roswell.

 >Again - doubtful. In my experience in the military, army-types
 >are not pack rats. If you don't need it today, throw it away. If
 >the 1st ATU utilized Rawins, then they would have taken them
 >back, not left them with the 509th. If they had left them
 >behind, the 509th would have thrown them out.

I'm sorry, I should have made it clear. The 1st ATU was assigned
to the base at Roswell. They were the airlifters as opposed to
the 509th Bomb Group which were the bombers.

And it has been my experience that when equipment was already
loaded on a pallet, and was unused, it was returned to the home
station rather than discarded. Yes, I know that Herbert Summer
was on TDY to Roswell and told Phil Klass that there were no
rawins at Roswell, but there is an indication there might have
been, just not where you would expect them.

<snip>

 >>>Brazel's interview makes it
 >>>quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >>>tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >>>not available at the RAFFB.

 >>If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
 >>remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
 >>two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
 >>the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.

 >Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
 >weather balloons - not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
 >altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
 >Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
 >transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
 >consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
 >especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
 >brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
 >true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

Yet quite obvious to Cavitt who stood around in the hot New
Mexico sun with Jess Marcel and never bothered to mention that
he thought they have found a balloon. "Jess, it's a balloon.
Let's go home..."

And I don't see how the color of the balloon would fool anyone. A
balloon is basically a balloon and once you've seen one, you can
pretty well identify others.

And, finally, the Air Force published a copy of the tags that
appeared on the Mogul balloons. So we have, attached to the
balloons and radar targets just the sort of tag that you suggest
helped others identify the balloons as such. Oh, yes, Charles
Moore said they had tags, but none were put on Flight 4.
Interesting...

 >Brazel initially dismissed his find as junk. It was only when he
 >found out about the reward that he decided to turn it in. He
 >also told Wilcox that his find 'looked meteorological'.

Actually, and contrary to popular belief (for which I have to
take some of the blame) this isn't true. There are no
indications that there was any mention of rewards for flying
saucers in the local press until after Brazel had already gone
into town. And even those that were mentioned had deadlines that
had been passed before Brazel got there.

Brazel's motivation for going into town was to find someone to
pick up the debris which was scattered, according to neighbors
and Bill Brazel, over quite an area. Since it was obviously
something that came from the sky, he thought the Army was
responsible. So, he went into town to get the Army to clean up
the mess... which, according to everyone except Bessie Brazel,
worked quite well.

 >>And we have a farmer in Circleville, Ohio, who found a weather
 >>balloon and Rawin target, a man who certainly never seen one
 >>before and who was easily able to identify it for what it was.

 >Not hard, when it had a tag identifying the manufacturer as
 >'Case Mfc.'.

 >>The weather balloon and Rawin targets were not so extraordinary
 >>that they defied identification by those who had not seen those
 >>specific items.

 >And yet, even when there was an identifying tag on the wreckage,
 >the farmer still turned it in as a 'Flying Disk'! Marcel did the
 >same, although his 'disk' did not have a manufacturer's tag.

The farmer, Sherman Campbell believed it would be the solution
to some of the flying disk sightings if the thing was airborne
and spinning. He recognized it as a weather balloon and rawin
target (though I doubt he would have used the term rawin, he
just recognized is as something that had been manufactured on
Earth). And Marcel had the ever silent Cavitt, who knew the
truth, standing right there but failing to mention the fact, if
we believe Cavitt's last tale.

 >>Regardless, it is very obvious that Rawins were not in use at
 >>Roswell in '47, and it is unlikely in-the-extreme that one
 >would>be available at the base to use as a 'substitution'.

 >Again, Rawins were not in use for standard weather balloon
 >systems. They were not tracked by radar, but visually. Seeing as
 >how weather balloons had been in use long before WWII - and
 >before radar - the technology was well understood by all
 >meteorologists of the day. The possible use of Rawins during the
 >Pacific tests is immaterial. The 509th didn't use them- the
 >meteorological unit did.

Yes, and I'm suggesting that the equipment shipped to Operation
Crossroad included the rawins, and that equipment was carried on
aircraft assigned to the base at Roswell... But that isn't
really the point. The real point is that the men at Roswell
could have gotten their hands on a rawin easily if they had
wanted one. It's not as if they were rare and used only in
limited circumstances.

Besides, that still doesn't answer the question as to how the
winds aloft data were gathered in Roswell. Seems to me that it
was gathered using a weather balloon and some sort of reflector
so that it could be tracked visually. And if someone was using
weather balloons and targets to gather the data in Roswell,
could this have been the source for the balloons  used by the
base... even if it was a civilian weather operation off base?

<snip>

 >So- if the material transported to Ft Worth was a Rawin and
 >Balloon, then there is only _one_ place where these could have
 >be found in the Roswell area- Foster's ranch.

There were balloons at Alamogordo; Lawton, OK. and half a dozen
other places near Roswell for them to have gotten the materials.
It would have been no real problem for them to get one even if
there were none in Roswell. I asked Newton about this and he
said that it would have been real easy to find one. He even
mentioned Lawton (think Ft. Sill and artillery here).

 >>But that wasn't the only place for them to be found. I believe
 >>the assumption here is invalid for the reasons mentioned above.

 >Well - I try not to assume anything. The available facts
 >indicate Roswell did not require, use or have available anything
 >resembling the material pictured on General Ramey's floor. So if
 >Marcel transported that wreaked balloon and Rawin, then Flight 4
 >is the only possible source in the area.

Except, according to ranchers in the area, material such as that
found in Flight No. 4 would not be left in the pastures where
the cattle would eat it. It would have been picked up before
Marcel and Cavitt could have gotten out there.

And, according to Charles Moore and Albert Crary's diary, Flight
4 was canceled when the rocket wasn't fired. According to Moore,
they stripped the equipment but then let the balloons go because
they couldn't stuff the helium back into the bottles. If true,
then the rawins were removed from Flight 4 and there were none
to deposit debris on the ranch.

<snip>

 >>Shandara got quite a different story from DuBose.

 >>Yes, Shandera alone got quite a different story from DuBose.

<snip>

 >>According to Shandera, he >>did not record the interview,
he just took notes.

 >Why should that factor into it? Jamie was most insistent with
 >his questions- going over the same ground three times. He
 >wanted a different answer. Yet every time, DuBose came back with
 >the same answers.

Have him prove it. There is no record, other than Shandera's
memory of the interview, which is in conflict with what others,
and a video taped record suggests. That's why the lack of a
recording figures into it.

 >BTW- my own personal take on the answers you got was that DuBose
 >was referring to the 'simplification' of the explanation given
 >to the press. Whether he or anyone on Ramey's staff knew
 >anything about Mogul is open for debate - and I think very
 >doubtful.

Except that Moore said they had gone to Roswell to gain their
assistance in recovering their balloons and they were required
by the CAA (forerunner to the FAA) to post NOTAMS about their
flights, and according to the Air Force the balloons were tagged
so the Mogul people could recovered the balloons... Oh yeah,
except for, according to Moore, Flight 4. They didn't put tags
on that one flight.

All this suggests that, at the very least, there were officers
in Roswell who knew about the Mogul balloons (though not the
purpose of the project) and that information would have been
communicated up the chain of command as events unfolded in
Roswell. And even with Mogul arrays, we're still talking about
weather balloons and radar targets made of terrestrial
materials.

 >However, they decided that it would be best if they
 >just called it a 'weather balloon', rather then go into details
 >about Rawins and such. That was the 'cover story' DuBose was
 >referring to. And DuBose never claimed that there had been a
 >switch of material.

Except they did go into that as evidenced in the newspaper articles
the next day... and of course, the staged launches from White Sands
that included the use of the ladder that had been purchased by
Charles Moore.

Again, the tapes and interviews conducted by others suggested
the material was switched... that the material on General
Ramey's floor was a weather balloon, though Shandera and J.B.
Johnson think that it is the real stuff.

<snip>

 >>Actually, I don't think it does. While Marcel might have told
 >>Moore that, I don't believe he said it to Pratt. Moore has
 >>offered various versions of his transcripts as evidence, but he
 >>seems to change them as the situation changes so I'm not
 >>convinced that anything we find in them is accurate.

 >Well, Marcel - in person - repeated this initial statement in the
 >movie 'UFOs are Real'.

Yes he did, and when shown the photographs said that it wasn't
the stuff he recovered. So, we are left with a question that
seems to have no answer. Marcel specifically said that the
photographs in Ramey's office were staged and did not contain
the material that he had recovered. So, what photographs did
Marcel mean?

<snip>

 >We just have to sort through the
 >half- truths, lies, confabulations and mistatements, which can
 >be a difficult thing to do.

 >Ain't that the truth! <gr>


Absolutely...

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:15:34 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:06:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:36 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads


<Giant, merciful snip>

 >So what have we got in the FW pictures?...debris that looks like
 >a weather balloon and radar target? ...sure....

 >But what happens when we look closely at the debris, what do we
 >find?.

 >We find some of that debris that couldn't possibly be from a
 >weather balloon and target, this additionally confirmed now by
 >measurements of the debris, measurements that check out as 98%
 >accurate on test articles of known size within the photographs.

 >If it looks like a duck _and_ quacks like a duck, then it most
 >probably is a duck.

 >But conversely,

 >The debris in the photographs might look like an ML307 and
 >balloon _but_ some of it has "bells and whistles" it shouldn't
 >have, and some of it's measurements don't fit.

<snip>

 >Neil

Neil,

What you're looking at in those pictures is the remains of a
weather balloon and a rawin target. End of discussion. No matter
how much you analyze it, or overanalyze it, as it were.

Consider your duck analogy. What is the likelihood that a
terrestrial balloon and rawin target would not only look like
the debris of an extraterrestrial space ship, but - happy
circumstance! - come within two percent or less of the exact
same dimensions?

Can you say near zero?

This is not a likely scenario, to put it mildly.

Although you are of course free to pursue it to the ends of the
Earth.

Even if it means submarining any credibility you might have had
re the interpretation of the Ramey memo.

Heed Rudiak's warning:

This is a non-starter. You are trying to make a silk purse out
of a sow's ear and it won't wash. To paraphrase Monty Python,
this particular bloody, blooming parrot is dead, deceased and
buried.

Quoth the Raven: "Nevermore!"

Instead of zooming in on the FW pictures, you need to zoom out
and see things for what they plainly are: a weather balloon and
rawin device.

You've been blinded by pixel dust.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:26:47 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:19:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gehrman


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:02:28 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:46:11 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:43:14 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>>>Yes, it is our contention that the debris on Ramey's carpet is
 >>>>some of the actual debris brought from Roswell by Marcel and
 >>>>that none of the debris is a RAWIN radar device.

 >>>I do not speak alone when I say that you guys are completely out
 >>>to lunch on this, particularly your statement that _none_ of the
 >>>debris is from a RAWIN radar target.

 >>>I can show you photos of the Rawins from that time period with
 >>>the identical white paper backing to the aluminum foil wrapped
 >>>around the sticks forming a straight white seam, just as you see
 >>>in these photos. The sheets of foil paper made up triangles 2' x
 >>>2' x 2.8', again evidenced in the photos. The stick lengths and
 >>>dimensions are certainly consistent with those used to make the
 >>>targets.

 >>David,

 >>As one of those "out to lunch" who _did_ come out with the
 >>statement that _none_ of the debris was that of an ML307 can I
 >>here publicly say I could be wrong.

 >OK, acknowledged. I was responding to Ed Gehrman's statment that
 >"our" contention (meaning RPIT's) was that literally none of the
 >debris could be accounted for by an ML307. Unfortunately, below
 >you are back to claiming that most of the debris cannot be
 >explained as an ML307.

David,

That is my contention but I'd certainly be willing to change my
mind if you were to present convincing evidence that I should.
So far you haven't. Even some of the debris that looks like it
belongs to a ML307 has photographic and measurement flaws that
put it in the category of "it might be".


 >>Over the last many weeks one of the RPIT members Andrew Lavoie
 >>a Canadian Engineering technologist has been using some 3D
 >>modelling software at his disposal to model the scene in
 >>currently one, of the Fort Worth photographs. With the aid of
 >>the software he is now getting size measurements of articles
 >>within the image with aprox 2% error. He has a set of material
 >>sizes given to him by Prof Charles Moore and taken directly
 >>from the intact ML307 he still has.

 >I have been doing the same thing the last few days with a 3D ray
 >tracer and also have measurements down to a few percent.

 >First of all, if memory services me, I don't think Moore's
 >intact ML307 is an original. I think it is a reconstructed model
 >made by Moore himself. Buyer beware.

 >Second, Moore is far from infallible on the specs. E.g. he gave
 >the weight of the ML307 in his AF interview as being only 100
 >grams, or only a little more than 3 ounces. But the manufacturer
 >in a 1947 article gave the weight as 12 ounces or around 350
 >grams. And a simple calculation of weight using reasonable
 >assumptions about the material areas, thicknesses, volumes, and
 >densities, also yields net weights in the neighborhood provided
 >by the manufacturer. It's literally impossible to get the weight
 >anywhere near 100 grams. The balsa sticks alone weigh more than
 >that.

 >Third, the specs changed over the years. So again, don't get too
 >hung up on one set of dimensions provided by Moore. The
 >manufacturer may also have changed suppliers now and then and
 >stock changed. Or maybe one month, the supplier mistakenly sent
 >stock a little out of spec, and rather than junk it or send it
 >back, they just made do with what they had on hand. This wasn't
 >rocket science. They were a toy manufacturer making balsa kites
 >for the Army.

 >Unfortunately neither the full specs nor tolerances for the
 >sticks were specified in the engineering diagram published in
 >the AF Roswell report, but some variation would be expected.
 >Therefore I don't understand the extreme conclusion jumping that
 >"this can't be from a radar target" when the measurements seem
 >to be only a little bit off from Moore's memory of what the
 >specs were.

 >I also don't get too spooked when somebody like Levoie says he
 >finds a stick that's off by a millimeter or two in thickness
 >from what Moore specified. That could be a normal variation from
 >specs or a spec Moore never provided or even a mistake on
 >Moore's or Levoie's part. I don't immediately conclude that this
 >must be original Roswell debris and couldn't possibly be from a
 >standard ML-307 radar target.

So who are we to believe and where are we to go for
measurements? Moore said in an interview that the NYU model
RAWIN had very specific measurements. My original focus in this
thread was to refute Karl's theses that the debris in the photos
was from a NYU model RAWIN not just your run-of-the-mill RAWINS.
I realize it looks like a RAWIN. But other material can be seen
that looks nothing like something you'd expect to find among
strictly RAWIN debris.

 >>Here's the interesting bit, _some_ of the measurements clustered
 >>on _some_ of the debris _do_ fit within a few percent, but it
 >>seems many more _do_not_ and this includes many of the struts,

 >I'm sorry, but I totally disagree. I would say the vast
 >majority, not _some_ agree within a few percent in length. Of
 >course, short pieces don't count, since they could be simply
 >broken. I cannot find even one overly long piece, and only one
 >piece which seems unusually thin (along the lower edge of the
 >brown paper).

You'll need to show this. Why not a map of the debris? Tell us
what it is you're looking at and then we can start the
discussion.

 >>some are out by 125% and more,

 >In what? Length, thickness? How many is some? One? A dozen? If
 >things are too short, so what? Things can be broken into smaller
 >pieces.

We need a map of what you're seeing. What listers don't
understand is that there are about fifty folks who have CD's
that show the FW photos. On these CD's Neil makes every effort
to show (a map ) what it is he is looking at and why he thinks
the objects shown are anomalous to a RAWIN target. There are
fifteen points in all:

"I've assembled a set of fifteen anomalies within the
photographs. These can be seen without any computer wizardry,
just a close look at the large prints of the photographs:

1) Embossed diagonal panel with characters on the surface of the
"radar reflector" foil.

2) Plug/Fastener and associated ribbon cable attached to "radar
reflector", a passive, unpowered device.

3) Cables attached to rear of foil/beam on "radar reflector"

4) Hollow "stick" supports, these officially specified as solid
and "wooden."

5) "Decorative" pattern designs to metallic sheet debris.

6) Thick (1/4"->1/2") metallic sheet debris.

7) Foil sheet edge tape showing hollow design containing wire
former.

8) "Balloon Envelope" having a "tassel" at the end of which is a
metallic fastener.

9) Molten metal bead and associated metallic spatter seen on
"balloon envelope."

10) Radar Target "support" sticks in a "wide" range of sizes and
more telling, in a large number of cross-sectional profiles(
They should be uniform square section)

11) "I" section metallic beams,(these formed no part of the
Rawin or it's Target). 12) Preformed sheet metal components
folded, punched

and press formed, (these in metal gauges far heavier than the
foil used in a Radar Target)13) "Plastic" like material
preformed and molded using complex curves.

14) Tubes and Cable structures associated with the "Balloon
Envelope" debris.

15) Unidentified complex debris showing signs of technology to
the rear of the foil sheet held by Jesse Marcel.

For copies of the four original negatives, write to:
University of Texas, Special Collections Division,
The University of Texas at Arlington Libraries,
Box 19497, ArlingtonTexas, 76019-0497

 >>also much of the edge tape seen
 >>in the pictures does not meet the size specs Prof Moore
 >>supplied.

 >This is a serious mistake. There is no "edge tape. The white
 >line along the edge of the foil triangles is not "tape." It is
 >the white paper backing to the foil wrapped around half of the
 >exterior diagonal struts forming "sheaths" for the sticks with
 >the white paper side out. This is clearly indicated in the
 >engineering diagram.

This isn't the way the sticks were held together. They were
glued on the paper and the tape was used as a reinforcer. I
think the folds described above were for the twine.

 >Where any the tape comes in here is specified in a blueprint
 >detail stating that the foil/foil seam where the wrapped-around
 >foil paper comes back on itself was not to be glued but held
 >together with clear acetate tape, an "exotic" material commonly
 >called in this country by its trade name of Scotch tape.
 >However, I and others have looked in vain for this tape, and
 >everybody has come up with a big zero, not surprising, since it
 >is clear.

 >The fact that this gross mistake is being made is a big red flag
 >that there is still an incomplete understanding on your side as
 >to how these targets were put together. Then apparently based on
 >this misunderstanding, some of you then jump to the conclusion
 >that something is way out of spec and further conclude that this
 >can't be a Rawin target. It must be "real," "anomalous" Roswell
 >debris.

Why don't you open you're AA DC set and see if we are confused.
Take a close gander at Mogul 14 and damned if it just isn't the
other way around. The foil is exposed, not the white backing.
Then look at mogul #16. So much for engineering specs.

 >Now Karl Pflock concluded otherwise but was equally mistaken.
 >His claim was that the white strip was clearly the Mogul white
 >tape with "flower patterns." Problem is, again, this isn't white
 >tape and he likewise doesn't know what he is talking about. And
 >there sure as hell aren't any flower patterns to be seen, on the
 >white strips nor anywhere else. The only difference here is that
 >he twists the exact same misunderstanding of construction into
 >supposed "supporting evidence" that this must be a radar
 >reflector from Mogul.

Yes and he's 100% wrong

 >>So can I now downgrade my statement to " only some of the debris
 >>_may_ be from an ML307".

 >I have yet to see a single thing, not one, that couldn't be part
 >of an ML-307. The fact that you state "only some" and further
 >qualify and emphasize "_may_ be" from an ML-307, indicates to me
 >that you are still well within Ed Gehrman's more extreme
 >position that "none" is from an ML-307.

 >And it seems to be based primarily on serious misunderstandings
 >on your part as to the construction of the radar targets.

There is no misunderstanding on how a RAWIN was constructed. But
again, what of Moore's recollection of how the ML307's were put
together. Are you totally discounting his testmony?

 >I find myself growing increasingly irritated as I watch this
 >whole debacle, originally started by James Bond Johnson about 3
 >years ago, unfold. He started out on some personal quest to
 >prove that he had photographed the "real" Roswell debris. Also,
 >for something to do with the feelings of Mrs. Ramey, he wanted
 >to exonerate Ramey of accusations that he had lied about what
 >happened and substituted a weather balloon for the real debris.
 >See, it was the real debris all along.

 >Then he started spinning the story. It seemed to change
 >practically every week. Unfortunately, he sucked in a lot of
 >well-meaning people and got them to buy into the snake oil he
 >was trying to peddle.

What a silly theory.

 >Now at first I thought sifting through the debris might be a
 >worthwhile venture. This was clearly an aluminum foil and balsa
 >radar target, but maybe something truly unusual got left behind
 >in the confusion. I was glad that somebody like Neil was willing
 >to take the time. Maybe something of real significance would
 >emerge.

 >But then the investigation went off half-cocked. Instead of one
 >or two things that might be anomalous, _everything_ became
 >anomalous.

There are problems with just about everything when you begin
taking a close look. That's not our problem, but the nature of
the debris.

 >So here we are in what I and most others consider to be a
 >complete waste of time, a needless diversion from far more
 >important issues.

And do you really think we care what others think until they
take a close look at our arguments? They have little if any
information to go on so what they think isn't important until
they begin to participate in a meaningful way and stick their
neck out.

 >The hardcore debunkers are chortling over the
 >infighting amongst the "saucer buffs" over the patently obvious.
 >The credibility of everybody ends up suffering as a result.

A sure sign of a weak argument. As for the rest of your
analysis, all I can say is that it was a waste of time. You can
argue all you want about this but until you draw a map of the
debris and account for all of it being a RAWIN and answer Neil's
fifteen points, all we really have is hot air. But most of all
I'd like you to explain the jig-saw puzzle looking piece in the
center of the Bettemann photo.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                            Something In The Air

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:47:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:47:20 -0500
Subject: Something In The Air

http://www.thesundaymail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,3615680%255E54
22,00.html

Something In The Air
Frances Whiting

20Jan02


It has been more than 70 years since the devil man came looking
for Jack Muriata.

Then, he was a little boy playing with his friends on the sandy
banks of the Tully River. Today he is a much respected Girrigun
elder but Muriata, 79, says time has not erased the terror of
that moonless night all those years ago.

"Our mothers and grandmothers used to tell us not to go too far
from camp in case the Devil Man came calling," Muriata said.

"Devil men, we Aborginals call them, or chic ah bunnahs.

"White people call them UFOs, and if you get caught by one, our
grandmothers told us, you will die.

"One night I was with my friends and we wandered too far from
our camp to the river.

"We were playing in the dunes when this great big ball of light,
so bright, you have never seen such a light, came flying down
from the sky above us.

"It lit up the whole river, and then it zoomed down low along
the banks, like it was looking for us.

"My friends were yelling, 'Run! Run!' and we all took off as
fast as we could back towards camp and our mothers.

"You don't want to get caught by the devil man."

Devil men, "chic a bunnahs", unidentified flying objects, call
them what you will, believe in them or not - but whatever they
are, and whatever name they go by, they do seem to be
particularly attracted to the small, picturesque north
Queensland town of Tully.

About 180km south of Cairns with a population of about 3400,
Tully would be like any other pretty sugar cane town in the far
north, but for several factors.

First of all, there's the famous Tully Gorge, where white-water
rafting enthusiasts from around the world gather to shoot down
its rapids.

Then there is Tully's extraordinary weather - with an average
annual rainfall of 4252mm, it is officially Australia's wettest
town and has decided to build a giant gumboot to celebrate the
fact.

But if you believe the locals, Tully's most interesting claim to
fame is that it is Australia's UFO headquarters, with hundreds
of sightings every year.

Muriata says the Aborigines have known about Tully's strange
visitors "since the beginning", and other, older locals such as
82-year-old cane farmer Albert Pennisi agree.

"Everyone who lives in Tully knows about the UFOs here," Pennisi
says. "It's just that some folks choose to talk about it and
some folks don't."

Pennisi is one who does - and no wonder. It was on his 83ha farm
that Tully's most famous UFO sighting took place.

On the morning of January 19, 1966, Pennisi's neighbour George
Pedley was driving his tractor across his banana farm when he
heard a strange hissing sound.

At first Pedley - who no longer speaks publicly about his
experience - thought the hissing was from his tractor tyres, but
Pennisi says the sound was instead coming from a medium sized,
horseshoe-shaped lagoon on Pennisi's property.

"Suddenly George saw this machine rise up from our lagoon - it
rose about 30 to 40 feet (10-12m) - and then it turned on its
side and just shot away." Pennisi said.

"It was gone, vanished into thin air."

But Pennisi and others who have visited the site believe it left
behind a souvenir of its visit.

"George went to the lagoon straight away and he saw the water
still swirling, still churning around.

"I think it really shook him up, and he came to get me but I was
away. Later on when I got back we went to the lagoon together
and, by crikey, did I get a shock."

Floating on Pennisi's normally unremarkable lagoon was a UFO
"nest", a 9m circular mass of reeds, tightly woven in an
intricate design swirling clockwise and so strong, Pennisi says,
it could easily support the weight of 10 men.

Pedley's sighting of the blue-grey saucer was never repeated,
but whatever made that first "nest" on Pennisi's dam kept making
it.

"They came back in 1972, 1975, 1980, 1982 and 1987," Pennisi
said.

"There was always the big one, but we also got about 22 smaller
ones and, the strange thing is, while the big one always went
clockwise, (the others) were always anti-clockwise."

Determined to explain the phenomena, Pennisi took to watching
the lagoon at all hours of the night.

"I wasn't scared. I didn't take any weapons with me except my
cane knife but I never did find out why they came to my farm -
or why they suddenly stopped coming, but I've got a fair idea
why."

Pennisi believes interest in his lagoon (carloads of people came
at the height of its fame) plus the attention of the police and
the air force may have made whatever - or whoever - was visiting
his farm, shy off.

"We had people from all over the world arriving: UFO
researchers, police, the air force investigators were watching
us 24 hours a day. It was all a bit much for a cane farmer."

After an extensive investigation by the police and the RAAF, a
1966 report by the Commonwealth Aerial Phenomena Investigation
Organisation (CAPIO), concluded:

"There is no explanation for the visible phenomena reported but
it could have been associated with or the result of 'down
draughts', 'willy willies' or 'water spouts' that are known to
occur in the (north Queensland) area."

Pennisi, a down-to-earth farmer not usually given to flights of
fancy, laughs at the explanation.

"They also tried to tell me it was a low-flying helicopter, a
mini tornado, even a crocodile. But anyone who saw it will tell
you whatever made it was not of this world, my friend.

"Before this thing happened to me, I might have been a bit
sceptical, too, but things change when you see things with your
own eyes."

And for many Tully locals, seeing it with their own eyes is all
that it takes to turn them from sceptics into believers.

Semi-retired handyman Les Holland, 60, reckons Tully is
"crawling with UFOs".

"I think I would have had trouble believing it if I hadn't seen
them myself," Les says. "There's a hell of a lot of activity
here.

"If you look up in the night sky in Tully, you'll see them soon
enough. Lots of very bright lights, moving quickly through the
sky. They're par for the course, but occasionally you see
something really mind-blowing.

"A few years ago I saw this massive one hovering above us - you
could see its lights: red, yellow, green. It was completely
silent, just hovering there then, in a flash, it was gone."

Holland's son Morgan, 17, has also had his fair share of
sightings. A keen fisherman, his late-night trips have yielded
much more than the tasty jungle perch he is angling for.

"Morgan was out one night about 18 months ago looking out over
Tully Heads when he very clearly saw a machine in the sky which
looked like a pyramid with the top part cut off it.

"He could see bands across it . . . he could see the whole thing
quite clearly. It didn't make any noise - most of them don't,
they're just silently hovering.

"It didn't bother Morgan and he didn't bother it. That's the
thing about Morgan, all he wants to do is fish - crocs, sharks,
UFOs nothing gets in the way of his fishing."

But one young Tully mother's experiences with what she believes
were UFOs were not so casual.

"I was living on a property just outside of town right on top of
this hill," says the woman, who asked
not to be identified.

[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

             Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:50:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:42:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:28:52 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 09:20:44 -0700
 >>From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules


 >No doubt my post will be recieved as a personal attack. However,
 >if rank amateurs like you and me can see the obvious faults and
 >pick Mortellaro's 'folly' apart so easily, imagine what trained
 >scientists and skeptics will do with it!


I really do not feel that you or I are rank amateurs in this
situation. I for one carry my scars, multiple ones thank you;
physical as well as mental ones. Memories are horrifying and
dreams can be worse. The only thing we seem to actually lack
that does make us rank amateurs is the ability to investigate
this properly and the only ones that seem to want to help, don't
seem to have the know-how. Back to square one!


Jean









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

             Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:54:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:45:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules - Meiners


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 14:54:36 EST
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

Instead of the 'general ranting'...I just think everyone just
needs to know that it is being done properly. Just because a
doctor is a surgeon doesn't necessarily mean he is a good one.
Then, again, there are good ones and there are excellent ones.

Personally, I would shop for an excellent one. I think that this
covers the full scope of the problem. Too many times things have
started and then exploded. Usually the explosion is on the
innocent ones who suffer the most.

Personal observation gentlemen. Personal observation.


Jean M









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                 Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:48:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:52:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules -


 >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:12:59 -0500
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >Subject: Re: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:18:48 EST
 >>Subject: Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome Rules
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >If you are going to make public declarations such as the one I
 >quoted from you above, you really need to do your homework and
 >preface such sweeping statements with some facts and citations
 >of substantiating studies/information. You need to include who,
 >what, and where or it's just more self-serving and meaningless
 >blather. It doesn't help the cause to secure a serious
 >investigation for _all_ of us.

 >You see, one of the things that myself and many others have been
 >working and fighting long and hard for is; a serious
 >investigation by the mainstream scientific and academic
 >community. Which will hopefully include _security/police_
 >experts as well. After all, what is being reported by so many
 >people from all parts of the globe is nothing short of willful
 >abduction/kidnap. A commonly acknowledged 'crime' in all
 >countries of the world.

<snip>

John, Jim and all

Jim being so evidently full of it, I figured I should, like all
lazy kid, help him along the way with his homework...

I started on your own site, John, with, who else, Stuart
Appelle... And you were gawddam right all the way.

Man, what kind of a freaking world do we live in to see people
supposedly helping other people but with no relevant background,
just goofy letters around their names, like: PhD, Dr, M.D.

You guys have no idea of the utter bull those weirdos can spit
out.

Here, take a look!!!

Follow the links!!!

____________________________________________________________

http://www.spacelab.net/~jvif/appelle3.htm

The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation Of Theory And
Evidence

Stuart Appelle

Part 3 - Psychopathology

Even when formal tests are used, their interpretation is
compromised by the fact that they may fail to distinguish
between dissociative tendencies and dissociative effects. For
example, Powers (I 994a) assessed a group of abduction
experiencers on the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
subscale of the MMPI, and on the Perceptual Alteration Scale
(PAS). PTSD is correlated with dissociative tendencies. The PAS,
another measure of dissociation, evaluates behavior in the
domains of control, self- monitoring, concealment,
consciousness, and sensory experience. Powers found a clear
correlation between abduction experiences and elevated PTSD and
PAS scores.

Although Powers was primarily concerned with the implications of
these results for therapy, it is clear from her discussion that
dissociative phenomenology was considered only as a possible
cause of the abduction experience and not as a possible effect.
But anyone experiencing an actual abduction by aliens might be
expected to have elevated scores on the measures assessed.
Indeed, in mundane cases of documented trauma (victims of rape,
terrorism, witnessing an atrocity) elevated scores on the kind
of measures used by Powers are both expected and obtained
(Wilson, 1990).


John Mack's Site

http://www.etcontact.net/Abduction.htm

Clinical Discrepancies Between Expected and Observed Data in
Patients Reporting UFO Abductions- Implications for Treatment

by Rima E. Laibow, M.D., Child and Adult Psychiatry

Although it has long been the "common wisdom" of both the
professional and lay communities that anyone claiming to be the
victim of abduction by UFO occupants must be seriously
disturbed, thoroughly deluded or a liar, careful examination of
both the reports and their reports calls this assumption into
question. Clinical and psychometric investigation of abductees
reveals four areas of discrepancy between the expected data and
the observable phenomena and suggests further investigation.
These discrepant areas are: 1) Absence of psychopathology, 2)
Concordance of reports, 3) Resistance to suggestion under
hypnosis, and 4) Post Traumatic Stress Disorders (PTSD) in the
absence of trauma.


http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/abduct050.html

UFO Abductions Through The Ages
by Dr. Gregory L. Little
1994

In addition, Raynes conducted a survey of his UFO percipients'
medical and psychological histories. Most of his medical
findings were within normal expectations of a sample of adults
randomly drawn from the population. However, the psychological
findings appear to strongly suggest a Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD) cluster of findings.


http://www.alienjigsaw.com/Part_I/keithenigma.html

The Truth About Abduction Enigma

By Keith Rowell with comments from Janet Colli, Ph.D. and
Deborah Lindemann, CHT (Copyright 2000)

A paper on PTSD and a criticism of Randle and Estes' work.

____________________________________________________________

BTW, I don't like you very much Jim Mortellaro.

That's why you're wrong.

I can't help it.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                Cydonian Imperative: 01-22-02 Mars Odyssey to

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 21:56:46 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:53:33 -0500
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 01-22-02 Mars Odyssey to


The Cydonian Imperative
1-22-02

Mars Odyssey Spacecraft to Examine Face
by Mac Tonnies

for links and images:
http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html


NASA project scientist Steve Saunders has released a list of
targets for the Mars Odyssey spacecraft, which includes the
controversial Face. According to Saunders, "We've got a number
of other high-priority targets that are of great interest to
people in general." Although not equipped with a high-resolution
camera, the Odyssey carries a Gamma Ray Spectrometer (GRS)
designed to reveal the chemical composition of the Martian
surface.

[image]

The Mars Odyssey orbiter.

The GRS's prospects for examining the Face are interesting to
consider. The Face, if artificial, may be a sculpture utilizing
indigenous Martian rock, in which case its chemical signature
will not differ from that of the Cydonia desert. But if the
Face's composition is more exotic, perhaps the Odyssey will
uncover evidence pointing toward an artificial origin. One
possibility is that portions of the wind-scoured western half of
the Face will reveal the presence of a metallic substructure.
The unusually well-defined "cells" surrounding the Face's
western "eye," for example, may indicate a "recently" exposed
structural matrix discernable to the Odyssey's GRS.

Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara have already argued that the
collapse evident on the Face's lower-east portion may have been
caused by a metal support structure literally rusting away. This
implyies that at least a portion of the Face formation might be
hollow (a trait in keeping with the Arcology Hypothesis).
Similarly, Lan Fleming has noted a dark crevasse along the
Face's eastern perimeter that may be an opening into the Face's
interior.

Instruments such as the Gamma Ray Spectrometer may help in
identifying materials consistent with artificiality until human
explorers can inspect the Cydonia site firsthand. In the online
journal New Frontiers in Science, Dr. Mark Carlotto notes that
"it is unlikely that optical imagery will provide much more
useful data on the Face" and recommends using radar as a means
of exploring the Face's eastern side, which appears partially
submerged in sand.

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                         Tully Australia UFO History

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:27:58 +1100
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:57:08 -0500
Subject: Tully Australia UFO History


Hi List,

My friend Paul Cropper alerted me to the following.

The Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Sunday Mail of January 20,
2002, ran a good article on Tully's long UFO history in
"Something in the Air" by Frances Whiting. It features Albert
Pennisi the owner of Horseshoe Lagoon, the site of the famous
1966 daylight close encounter experience of George Pedley.

The article also records the experience of Girrigun aboriginal
elder Jack Muriata (79), in the area as a kid more than 70 years
ago (ie. 1932 or earlier) with what aborigines called "chic ah
bunnahs" or "devil men", in this case a "great big ball of
light" that seemed like it was looking for the kids, who had
been playing in the dunes, on the sandy banks of the Tully
River.

A web version exists at the Sunday Mail web site:

http://www.thesundaymail.news.com.au/

Go to the Sunday Extra section.

Frances Whiting mentions George Pedley "no longer speaks
publicly about his experience" and this is generally the case. I
have had contact with George intermittently over the decades and
most recently interviewed him for a retrospective piece Reader's
Digest Australia ask me to do in their July, 2001 issue "A
Second Look at UFOs".

IUR (International UFO Reporter from the Center for UFO Studies)
published a detailed report on Tully I prepared, part of which
appears at:

http://www.project1947.com/forum/bctully.htm
http://www.internetezy.com.au/~mj129/ufoic_investigation_history.html

I have a strong interest in historical pre 1947 UFO reports:

http://www.internetezy.com.au/~mj129/early_aus_historical_encounters.html
http://www.project1947.com/bcausenc.htm

and the aboriginal experience with UFOs:

http://www.internetezy.com.au/~mj129/history_australian_ufo_history.html
http://www.project1947.com/forum/bcabor.htm

I have duplicated each link as the internetezy site is a
temporary haven for my 'The OZ Files' web site which is under
development. I expect it will be very shortly moving to its own
OZ files domain web site name.

The Tully area has had a very interesting UFO connection and the
1966 George Pedley experience is a powerful example of a close
encounter of the second kind.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard

From: Michael Haggard <mikeh@cybertrails.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 05:20:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 10:01:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life' - Haggard


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:16:49 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Michael Haggard <mikeh@cybertrails.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Review: 'Abduction In My Life'
 >>Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 14:06:46 -0700

 ><snip>

 >>P K D wrote the book Valis that suggested aliens sent him
 >>information through a beam of light. There has been much
 >>UFO/Conspiracy theory about the book being auto-biographical.

 >Having read his collected writings, I don't see any
 >"conspiracy". 'Valis' was an admittedly autobiographical novel
 >and even contained bits of Dick's nonfiction 'Exegesis'.

I don't mean that PKD had a conspiracy theory or that one is
obvious in his works; rather that several others have written
conspiracy theories about him and Valis. I have read a few in
the ditto-machine newsletters that were around before the
internet (when Fact Sheet Five was the center of all underground
knowledge). I remember one that was advertised as a "review" of
Valis but turned into a long rant about how PKD was teaching
channeled information through his book and that it was
dis/mis-information from the grays.

 >>There is also W.A. Harrison

 >Harbinson, actually...

Indeed, you are correct, thank you.

 >>with the books Genesis, Inception, and Revelation dealing
 >>with the possibility that UFOs are from a possible alien
 >>changeling who worked for the Nazis (but for his own ends).

 >The mastermind/bad guy in Harbinson's UFO novels wasn't an
 >alien; he was a genius earthling who'd managed to postpone
 >death through cybernetics. Harbinson's scenario is that the
 >entirety of the modern UFO phenomenon can be explained by the
 >experiments of an eccentric and amoral genius.

 >I've got the gist of this theory catalogued at:

 >http://mactonnies.com/whosthere.html

Thanks, Mac, I will check it out. It has been years since I read
them, but I thought there was a hint that the man "could" have
been alien and not even known it... But now that you mention it,
it seems that the author did want us to come away with a totally
terrestrial view of the UFOs.


Blessed be,

The Haggard








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 22

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 11:14:12 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 10:04:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:15:34 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:36 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

<snip>

 >>The debris in the photographs might look like an ML307 and
 >>balloon _but_ some of it has "bells and whistles" it shouldn't
 >>have, and some of it's measurements don't fit.

<snip>

 >What you're looking at in those pictures is the remains of a
 >weather balloon and a rawin target. End of discussion. No matter
 >how much you analyze it, or overanalyze it, as it were.

<snip>

Dennis,

If you start with a preconceived idea, i.e. it's a weather
balloon just as we have been told for the last 50+ years, you
will indeed see lots of foil and sticks just as you would expect
to see, so confirming your belief.

Unfortunately it's quite possible in the haste to confirm your
belief you will quite likely miss or worse still, dismiss, all
the stuff in the pictures that _shouldn't_ be there.

It's the stuff that _shouldn't_ be there I'm curious about.

Check the Feb MUFON Journal, I've supplied a couple of clear
images of just two of the more obvious anomalies. It's very easy
to trot out the mantra "it's nothing but balloon debris", what
I'd like to see is some serious thought given to explain these
items which are not accounted for by simple balloon and radar
target debris.


Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Randle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 10:13:07 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 04:35:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Randle


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:36 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:55:26 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:00 +0000
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>>From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:25:33 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >Neil Morris wrote:

 >>In the final analysis, what Bond Johnson did or did not say to
 >>Kevin in the phone interviews (and yes I do have a copy of
 >>Kevin's tapes) has to be settled between the two parties
 >>involved

 >Although I have tried to be polite, there are some things that
 >just annoy the hell out of me and this is one of them. Please
 >remember that I hadn't named any of the members of RPIT to whom
 >I had sent tapes. Neil volunteered this information himself and
 >then suggested that we, meaning Dr. Johnson and I, should
 >attempt to settle this matter. Oh, I have tried, for more than
 >ten years, ever since Dr. Johnson decided that he had seen the
 >real debris and that General Ramey didn't know what he had when
 >Dr. Johnson arrived at the office.

 >For those of you tired of this debate, please punch out now. For
 >the rest of you, I pose a single question to Neil. Having heard
 >my tapes, having seen the correspondence between Dr. Johnson and
 >me, just where have I misrepresented anything in this long and
 >rather tiresome debate?

 >Kevin,

 >Why are you having a pop at me over this?, I'm merely a
 >bystander not a combatant.

Neil, List, All -

Because you mentioned the tapes and because I heard nary a
comment from you about the tapes and other materials once you
had gotten them and had a chance to listen to them. And because
others in the RPIT have gotten copies of the material and said
nothing about them. Because it is clear that the original
inspiration for the examination of the photographs was Dr.
Johnson's tired claim that he photographed "real" debris.

 >And as far as I'm aware I've not mentioned "misrepresentation".

Didn't say that you had. Merely asked if after perusing the
materials you had found any evidence that I had misrepresented
the situation at all.

<snip>

 >>During that conversation, he told me that Ramey had told him it
 >>was a weather balloon and that he had taken just two
 >>photographs. (Here is a point in which Neil wins something...
 >>Dr. Johnson remembered just two photographs, but conceded that
 >>the Marcel photograph looked as if he, Dr. Johnson, had taken
 >>it. I think we all agree that Dr. Johnson took six photographs
 >>and I don't hold it against him that his memory failed on this
 >>point.)

 >Didn't you have had red flags popping up here, surely this is a
 >big indicator as to the safety of the rest of Bond's testimony?.

The fact that he got a minor detail wrong after more than 40
years? Why should this mistake bother me? It smacked of being a
simple mistake and nothing more.

 >As I've said in the past (a number of times) I think Bond's
 >story (and I hope he might agree with this) is nothing more than
 >a collection of vague impressions, I personally would not like
 >to tag any recalled conversations from them as being accurate as
 >you seem to have done.

I think you've missed the point. I have suggested that the story
changed significantly. I have suggested that even when he heard
himself say the things that he denies he said, he has to blame
me for the changes. I don't believe I have suggested that one
version is better than the other, only that the changes are
significant and suggest that neither version is reliable.

<snip>

 >Kevin.

 >Can I say here, and I hope this goes for all the RPIT team.

 >THE RPIT's conclusions are _not_ based on Bond Johnson's
 >testimony but on the analysis of the pictures he took together
 >with other archive material from the time.

Understood and always has been.

 >In fact what Bond did or did not say is totally irrelevant as
 >far as the work with the FW pictures is concerned, and the
 >identity of the person who took them in no way reflects on what
 >they recorded.

Ah, but it is not irrelevant if, as he originally suggested, General
Ramey told him it was a weather balloon. Then, we have an
identification and when we look at the pictures, we see that
identification.

And, rather than rely on the 40 year old memories, we go to the
documented sources, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, and we see, in
the last paragraph of the story that Dr. Johnson wrote (oops,
forgot he now denies he wrote it), "After his first look, Ramey
declared all it was was a weather balloon. The weather officer
verified his view."

 >I would hope we are both agreed that what we see in the them is
 >a true record of events at some point during that afternoon?,
 >and as such is far more accurate than any 40-50 year old
 >memories.

Yes, I see a weather balloon and radar target. I see no alien
debris or anything extraterrestrial.

 >>My point here is that Neil has the tapes, has the letters and
 >>has other supporting documentation. Rather than deal with it, he
 >>ignores it, suggesting that Dr. Johnson and I work out the
 >>differences. I have tried and hoped that those on the RPIT who
 >>should have more influence with Dr. Johnson could get some of
 >>the answers. The question that remains is why have they been so
 >>quiet on this point? Why won't they admit the truth?

 >???Why am _I_ expected to deal with _your_ differences with a
 >3rd party???

Nope, you are expected to deal with the facts of the case,
including the identification of the material, by Ramey, in his
office to Dr. Johnson. And Dr. Johnson's claims, early on, that
all he saw was a weather balloon.

 >I really don't see where you're coming from here.

 >As I've tried to outline, Bond's testimony is _not_ what the
 >RPIT's research is about, and frankly at the end of the day is
 >that testimony crucial to the scheme of things?. IMHO no, I for
 >one am happy to put it to one side until some, all or none is
 >corroborated, at the moment some of it has.

And which version has been corroborated? The first? The second?
That he unwrapped packages in Ramey's office? That no one knew
it was a weather balloon until sometime late in the evening?
That he was told it was a weather balloon? Just which version of
events is being corroborated by this unidentified source?

<Whopping huge snip>

 >The Reuters report reads:
 >-----
 >Before Brigadier General Rameys broadcast Major Edwin Kirtan,
 >duty officer at Eighth Air Force headquarters at Fort Worth,
 >quoted him as saying "it looks like a hexagonal object covered
 >with tinfoil or other shining material suspended from a balloon
 >of about twenty feet in diameter. It is possibly a weather
 >balloon flown at the highest altitude but none of the army men
 >at this base recognize it as an army type balloon."

Which is in conflict with what Dr. Johnson wrote in the Star-
Telegram... oops, forgot he now denies he wrote that story. Oh,
well, the point is still valid. Ramey knew what it was when he
saw it, according to that story. So, which quote is accurate?

Or is it the key "Army" type balloon... A rawin target and
weather balloon would not really be an Army balloon.

<snip>

 >In conclusion, we therefore appear to have a period sometime
 >after 3.26pm when FWAAF seems have been giving out a straight
 >story and openly cooperating with press inquires, and without
 >any hint of a security matter in sight. Could we speculate on
 >this early, apparently open cooperation with the press being
 >extended to an acting Star Telegram photographer taking some
 >pictures?, Ramey did not seem to have any problem about Reuters
 >being told they didn't know what the heck the debris was, and
 >having gone that far verbally, was there reason then to stop a
 >photographer taking it's picture too?.

Except that the photographer was told at the time it was a
weather balloon, a simple fact reported in the story in the
Star-Telegram. Which quote is probably more accurate? The one
received by the reporters who were actually in Fort Worth (and
in General Ramey's office, according to the first version) or
those made by a news service reporter who, at best, talked to
Major Kirton rather than General Ramey?

Here's where we are. DuBose said, on tape, that the material in
General Ramey's office was a weather balloon, period. Marcel,
when shown the pictures taken by Dr. Johnson, said that it was
not the material he found in New Mexico (as reported by Johnny
Mann who interviewed Marcel in 1980). Irving Newton said that
the material was a weather balloon. J. Bond Johnson, who was
obviously in Ramey's office, said, originally, that he was told
the material was a weather balloon. Seems to me that those who
were there have identified the material.

Now we get to the actual photographs. They show the blacked
balloon envelop. They show wrinkled material that looks to be
fairly flexible. They show material that looks suspiciously like
the tattered remains of a rawin target.

In the end, based on the reliable testimony, the photographs,
and everything else that we can see, we have a weather balloon
and no alien debris.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:34:01 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 04:39:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:02:28 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:46:11 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:43:14 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:39:08 -0800

 >>David,

 >>As one of those "out to lunch" who _did_ come out with the
 >>statement that _none_ of the debris was that of an ML307 can I
 >>here publicly say I could be wrong.

 >OK, acknowledged. I was responding to Ed Gehrman's statment that
 >"our" contention (meaning RPIT's) was that literally none of the
 >debris could be accounted for by an ML307. Unfortunately, below
 >you are back to claiming that most of the debris cannot be
 >explained as an ML307.

David,

Ok, for the record. I now accept some of the debris _may_ be
ML307 in origin, but I also still believe some of the debris
most probably wasn't, to what extent?, when Andrew has completed
a detailed survey we may be in a position to hazard a guess.

 >>Over the last many weeks one of the RPIT members Andrew Lavoie
 >a>Canadian Engineering technologist has been using some 3D
 >>modelling software at his disposal to model the scene in
 >>currently one, of the Fort Worth photographs. With the aid of
 >>the software he is now getting size measurements of articles
 >>within the image with aprox 2% error. He has a set of material
 >>sizes given to him by Prof Charles Moore and taken directly
 >from>the intact ML307 he still has.

 >I have been doing the same thing the last few days with a 3D ray
 >tracer and also have measurements down to a few percent.

 >First of all, if memory services me, I don't think Moore's
 >intact ML307 is an original. I think it is a reconstructed model
 >made by Moore himself. Buyer beware.

I understood the sample he had was that of a late series C
(1950's) target where they had beefed up the backing paper and a
few other modifications. Photographs from the 47/48 NYU launches
seem to show the paper/foil as being a lot more flimsy that the
heavy/stiffer backing on Moore's current sample.

 >Second, Moore is far from infallible on the specs. E.g. he gave
 >the weight of the ML307 in his AF interview as being only 100
 >grams, or only a little more than 3 ounces. But the manufacturer
 >in a 1947 article gave the weight as 12 ounces or around 350
 >grams. And a simple calculation of weight using reasonable
 >assumptions about the material areas, thicknesses, volumes, and
 >densities, also yields net weights in the neighborhood provided
 >by the manufacturer. It's literally impossible to get the weight
 >anywhere near 100 grams. The balsa sticks alone weigh more than
 >that.

As I understand from Andrew, the strut dimensions Moore gave
_do_ match very closely _some_ of the sizes Andrew has measured
ie only 1% error, these measurements were clustered on the
upright foil sails resting against DuBose's knee, away from this
debris ie checking some laid out on the paper sheets, is where
the large errors start to show.

 >Third, the specs changed over the years. So again, don't get too
 >hung up on one set of dimensions provided by Moore. The
 >manufacturer may also have changed suppliers now and then and
 >stock changed. Or maybe one month, the supplier mistakenly sent
 >stock a little out of spec, and rather than junk it or send it
 >back, they just made do with what they had on hand. This wasn't
 >rocket science. They were a toy manufacturer making balsa kites
 >for the Army.

Point taken, but wouldn't the specs given to the manufacturers
be based on the original Signal Corp engineering specs and apart
from a few minor revisions they didn't seem to change that much
from 1944 when first designed through to the mid 1950's, and
they seem to call for a +-2% tolerance.

Also if this was a _single_ ML307 as you are saying, I would
have thought there _would_ be consistency within the components
used in a single example. If the targets were produced on
anything like a production line, enough quantities of each
component required for assembly would or should have been on
hand to complete all the units for the order.

 >Unfortunately neither the full specs nor tolerances for the
 >sticks were specified in the engineering diagram published in
 >the AF Roswell report, but some variation would be expected.
 >Therefore I don't understand the extreme conclusion jumping that
 >"this can't be from a radar target" when the measurements seem
 >to be only a little bit off from Moore's memory of what the
 >specs were.

 >I also don't get too spooked when somebody like Levoie says he
 >finds a stick that's off by a millimeter or two in thickness
 >from what Moore specified. That could be a normal variation from
 >specs or a spec Moore never provided or even a mistake on
 >Moore's or Levoie's part. I don't immediately conclude that this
 >must be original Roswell debris and couldn't possibly be from a
 >standard ML-307 radar target.

Nope I wasn't spooked by that, it's the fact that some,
clustered together on particular pieces of debris _do_ match
very closely Moore's specs, yet others associated with other
debris are way off. The impression being the measurement
correlation is not a random distribution.

 >>Here's the interesting bit, _some_ of the measurements clustered
 >>on _some_ of the debris _do_ fit within a few percent, but it
 >>seems many more _do_not_ and this includes many of the struts,

 >I'm sorry, but I totally disagree. I would say the vast
 >majority, not _some_ agree within a few percent in length. Of
 >course, short pieces don't count, since they could be simply
 >broken. I cannot find even one overly long piece, and only one
 >piece which seems unusually thin (along the lower edge of the
 >brown paper).

 >>some are out by 125% and more,

 >In what? Length, thickness? How many is some? One? A dozen? If
 >things are too short, so what? Things can be broken into smaller
 >pieces.

Cross-sectional profile, ie from memory one checked was out by
an excess of 130% another by 127%.

<snip>

I take your point about the construction methods but an anomaly
does exist in one of the Marcel pictures where what appears to
be a buckle assembly can be made out on the surface of this
"white edging", this isn't the sort of thing you would think
would be very practical on foil/paper and isn't part of the
ML307 spec.

 >>So can I now downgrade my statement to " only some of the debris
 >>_may_ be from an ML307".

 >I have yet to see a single thing, not one, that couldn't be part
 >of an ML-307. The fact that you state "only some" and further
 >qualify and emphasize "_may_ be" from an ML-307, indicates to me
 >that you are still well within Ed Gehrman's more extreme
 >position that "none" is from an ML-307.

 >And it seems to be based primarily on serious misunderstandings
 >on your part as to the construction of the radar targets.

David, I have seriously shifted my stance here by accepting some
of the debris may be from an ML307, but let's not fall out over
trying to quantifying how much, I'm still looking forward to
further results from Andrew as he continues his measurements so
we can isolate what may and may not be ML307 debris.

<snip>

 >Now at first I thought sifting through the debris might be a
 >worthwhile venture. This was clearly an aluminum foil and balsa
 >radar target, but maybe something truly unusual got left behind
 >in the confusion. I was glad that somebody like Neil was willing
 >to take the time. Maybe something of real significance would
 >emerge.

 >But then the investigation went off half-cocked. Instead of one
 >or two things that might be anomalous, _everything_ became
 >anomalous.

 >So here we are in what I and most others consider to be a
 >complete waste of time, a needless diversion from far more
 >important issues. The hardcore debunkers are chortling over the
 >infighting amongst the "saucer buffs" over the patently obvious.
 >The credibility of everybody ends up suffering as a result.

 >It's a classic example of looking at the leaves and failing to
 >see either the forest or the trees.

No not everything is anomalous, in a reply to a skeptical
posting some time ago I rattled off from the top of my head 15
anomalies I could easily point to in the pictures, all of them
didn't make sense if the debris was accepted as that of an ML307
target and a neoprene balloon, (Ed Gehrman has listed these
points in a recent post to this thread), I'm still waiting for
these points to be explained away in respect of the debris.

<snip>

 >The large triangular piece with stick attached held in Newton's
 >left hand where he is posing to the left of the debris was
 >previously over more to the right and further back in the Marcel
 >and Ramey, Ramey/Dubose photos. Newton has laid the edge of the
 >stick/triangular piece down right where this "twisted piece" was
 >in the other photos. In other words, it may simply be a case of
 >it being hidden from view by this large piece previously not in
 >that position.

 >But instead you again jump to an unwarranted conclusion that
 >because the piece can no longer be seen in the one and only one
 >Newton photo, this necessarily means that it has been
 >deliberately removed and the scene "sanitized" for Newton's
 >appearance. I can't emphasize enough how incredibly faulty this
 >logic is.

Sanitised, removed or just missing, it and a few other pieces of
debris that I would class as anomalous are no longer in shot.
It's a valid observation whether it was intentional on the AAF's
part or not.

 >>That
 >>piece of debris has a number of anomalies that single it out as
 >>none ML307 debris, it's thickness is far greater than any foil
 >>used in a radar target so much so that it shows clearly on one
 >>end a very neat right angled folded lip, it also has clearly
 >>defined raised /stamped markings.


<snip>

Re the twisted/folded strip:

Dave I think you are looking at the wrong debris in the wrong
picture.

The strip referred to is best seen in the Marcel pictures. If
you place an imaginary 10x10 grid on the MarcelRight picture the
feature is at aprox the cross point of x1 y2 from the bottom
left.

 >And that's all it is. The "bareness" of the metal is easily
 >explained (delamination of the foil paper) as is the right angle
 >bend (foil molded to the underlying stick). The "symbols" are
 >probably imaginary, just crinkles in the foil or maybe
 >impressions left from being molded to the stick earlier. The 1
 >mm anomalous thickness I suspect is also strictly imaginary,
 >since you are getting down to the pixel resolution of even the
 >best of images. E.g., on Stan Friedman's negative scan, which is
 >4000 pixels across of the Ramey/Dubose photo, each pixel
 >represents about 1/2 mm in that region. There is just no way to
 >accurately resolve anything less than a millimeter in thickness.

The measurements were made using the MarcelRight image from my
11x14 prints scanned at 2400dpi. The Marcel pictures were taken
closer in than the others and in my scans I can just resolve the
hairs on the back of Marcel's hand and certainly resolve the
stitching on his uniform and boots, I'm guessing this is at near
to sub 1mm level, and ok these items are fuzzy but they _are_
visible.

 >A very good example of a stick with some foil/paper and paper
 >still attached lies directly below the "anomalous" metal piece
 >(a portion of the anomalous piece runs underneath it). The
 >foil/paper has been wrapped across or around the stick paper
 >side in, and glued directly to the stick. To the left side, the
 >foil is seen still attached and molded to the stick (the glued
 >paper hidden from view underneath), but to the right of this,
 >the foil has separated from the paper, and shards of white paper
 >can still be seen glued to the stick.

As I mention above I think we are at cross purposes here, the
debris I refer to is a well defined and flat strip save for some
regular looking pressed markings and the folded end lip, the
fold is across the narrow axis of the strip not along it's
length as you would expect if this were some strut/foil
artifact, there appears to be no strut debris associated with
it.

 >Delamination of the foil/paper not only explains bare foil or
 >paper pieces, it probably also explains the so-called anomalous
 >white "thick pieces," which look like they've been cut out with
 >a jigsaw. But I think the simple reality of it is, this is just
 >torn foil/paper (hence the "jigsaw" pattern) that is partially
 >delaminated. A little gap opens up in between, giving the
 >illusion of thickness. The rest of the illusion occurs because
 >the flash is so close to the camera lens, causing very little
 >shadowing within the gaps. Instead, the spaces between the white
 >paper on top and the foil below are filled with light, and it
 >looks like a solid white piece of something with elaborate cuts
 >in it.

David, I've very deliberately not played up the subject of the
"thick" debris of late as the research into the Bettmann image
has developed into a bit of an enigma itself, ie why is the
current print obtained directly from the copy negative (and in
two individual reprints) lower in definition than the 6+ year
old half-tone print I originally found?, and why is it that this
print shows the "thick" debris while the current direct print is
so badly "bleached" out in those areas comparisons are almost
impossible?. I have a friend in the publishing industry who has
examined the half tone print knowing the processes involved, he
could only come up with one very obscure printing flaw that
_might_ account for the "thick debris" being a printing error,
but an image detail within the thick debris itself makes this
flaw impossible as it also does for assuming the "thickness" of
the debris was generated by a highly _selective_ double
exposure.

I'm happy to discuss what I've seen in the image but until I've
done more background work in tracing more good early examples of
the image for comparison and possibly tracing the history of the
half tone print I have, it has to remain an interesting
curiosity showing some unique features but sitting in the "grey
basket" for the time being.

My hopes at the moment are that for all Corbis have allegedly
searched what was the Bettmann archives for this negative and
only produced the current example, because of the superior
clarity of my original example I live in hopes there might be a
better photographic example still out there somewhere, even the
original print that was used to produce my half tone.

<snip>

 >>>>If it's not a RAWIN, what is it?

 >>>No need to speculate here, since it is a RAWIN.

 >>David, the above piece of debris is clearly seen in the Marcel
 >>images without any digital enhancement, what part of a ML307
 >>target was this?.

 >See above. You know what part of the problem is here? If you
 >tear anything up, you are going to end up with bits and pieces
 >that are difficult to place within the original object. They
 >look unfamiliar.

 >Suppose we had torn up Ramey's dress uniform, thrown it on his
 >rug, and taken some black and white photos. Then we have the
 >tailor's original diagram, people start pouring over it and
 >trying to match it to the pieces on the ground.

 >If you just step back and look at the photos, you can see a torn
 >sleeve here, a torn trouser leg there, and it is obvious it is
 >some torn up clothing. But if you look at the itty-bitty pieces
 >under a microscope, a lot of it doesn't seem familiar anymore.

 >People start saying, "You claim that is Ramey's dress uniform,
 >but this alleged sleeve is half an inch off the tailor's specs.
 >And this piece... where did it come from?"

 >And for each little fragment you contest, somebody like me comes
 >along and says, well I can't be sure, but it looks like it was
 >torn from the lining of the coat. Then you find another fragment
 >and claim it doesn't match anything on the tailor's diagram.
 >"Can't be Ramey's dress uniform."

 >You can chase gnats like this forever. Stop chasing the gnats.
 >Step back and look at the forest.


Using the above example to explain my way of looking at the
photos:

If while looking closely at photographs of said torn up uniform
I come across a shoulder epaulet with 2 stars, but hang on Ramey
was only a one star back then?, and further, looking at a piece
containing some medal tabs I find honors Ramey was never
awarded, I then find the shoulder flash and it's not for the 8th
Air Force. What can I conclude other than it does not appear to
be Ramey's uniform even though I can confirm from partially
reading the tailors label just on the limits of resolution, it's
his size.

Ok, it's way over the top as an example, but you get my drift.

 >>Also in the Marcel images cables can be seen to the rear of a
 >>beam section attached to a foil sheet, what part of a ML307
 >>target was this?.

 >I don't know. I remember looking at your Web site about 2 years
 >ago and not making out much of anything. I don't have the image
 >in front of me and your site is down. e-mail me a copy and I'll
 >have another look. But I suspect it is just another gnat to
 >chase. It takes a lot of time to refute this stuff, and I have
 >things I'd rather be doing.

The old website had to go in a location move but I'd be happy to
email you the "cables" image, I do appreciate you comments.

 >I remember spending some time back then examining your "thick
 >pieces" and telling you that it looked like an illusion caused
 >by delaminated foil/paper. I sent back your blow-up with arrows
 >marking edges which more clearly showed the separation of foil
 >and paper and shadowing just beneath the top sheet. I never
 >heard back. You seem to have blown this off and are still
 >claiming there are anomalous thick pieces in the photos.

See my comments on this above.

 >>I too have images of ML307's from 1947/48 and also images of the
 >>ML307C Charles Moore still has, and the Army Signal Corp ML307
 >>drawings. I _cannot_ resolve these items. I therefore have to
 >>conclude these items of debris, along with others I cannot
 >>resolve do not belong to an ML307 as the AF concluded. If you
 >>too cannot identify just these two items of anomalous debris
 >>then I cannot see logically how you can continue in your stance
 >>that _all_ the debris in the pictures is a radar reflector,
 >>because these two items and few others plainly say it's not.

 >See my comments above regarding Ramey's suit. Fragments may look
 >unfamiliar simply because the whole has been torn up and the
 >spatial context has been partially lost. That doesn't mean they
 >are from somewhere or something else.

I agree David, but if things turn out to be at odds with known
facts as in the simplified example of Ramey's uniform what do
you do?. Sit back and accept it's Ramey's as  originally told?
or question and run down the anomalies found?.

 >>I'm not making this stuff up, go look and see for yourself in
 >>the Marcel Right image... it also has the cable loom that an
 >>ML307 didn't have.

 >>Neil

 >Send it on, Neil, I'll try to give it an honest appraisal. But
 >from what I've seen so far, I'm not too hopeful that it is
 >anything truly anomalous.

I'll email the cables image to you from home this evening.


Best Regards

Neil










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 13:39:26 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 04:47:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:15:34 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:36 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 ><Giant, merciful snip>

 >>So what have we got in the FW pictures?...debris that looks like
 >>a weather balloon and radar target? ...sure....

 >>But what happens when we look closely at the debris, what do we
 >>find?.

 >>We find some of that debris that couldn't possibly be from a
 >>weather balloon and target, this additionally confirmed now by
 >>measurements of the debris, measurements that check out as 98%
 >>accurate on test articles of known size within the photographs.

 >>If it looks like a duck _and_ quacks like a duck, then it most
 >>probably is a duck.

 >>But conversely,

 >>The debris in the photographs might look like an ML307 and
 >>balloon _but_ some of it has "bells and whistles" it shouldn't
 >>have, and some of it's measurements don't fit.

 ><snip>


 >What you're looking at in those pictures is the remains of a
 >weather balloon and a rawin target. End of discussion. No matter
 >how much you analyze it, or overanalyze it, as it were.

 >Consider your duck analogy. What is the likelihood that a
 >terrestrial balloon and rawin target would not only look like
 >the debris of an extraterrestrial space ship, but - happy
 >circumstance! - come within two percent or less of the exact
 >same dimensions?

 >Can you say near zero?

 >This is not a likely scenario, to put it mildly.

 >Although you are of course free to pursue it to the ends of the
 >Earth.

 >Even if it means submarining any credibility you might have had
 >re the interpretation of the Ramey memo.

 >Heed Rudiak's warning:

 >This is a non-starter. You are trying to make a silk purse out
 >of a sow's ear and it won't wash. To paraphrase Monty Python,
 >this particular bloody, blooming parrot is dead, deceased and
 >buried.

 >Quoth the Raven: "Nevermore!"

 >Instead of zooming in on the FW pictures, you need to zoom out
 >and see things for what they plainly are: a weather balloon and
 >rawin device.

 >You've been blinded by pixel dust.

 >Dennis Stacy

List,

Well, it's official! Hell has finally frozen over! Dennis Stacy
and I are in 100% agreement on something.

Snap some photos for your grandkids, because this historic event
won't last long. Satan's weather officer predicts a return to
normal temperatures within a day or two.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                         Re: Philip K. Dick - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 15:03:34 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 04:48:31 -0500
Subject: Re: Philip K. Dick - Sandow


 >Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:09:01 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Philip K. Dick [was: Review: Abduction in My Life]
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >As PKD is one of my main inspirations, let me say
 >"wow." You're
 >the first person I've encountered who actually met Dick, not
 >counting K.W. Jeter.

Can't say it was inspiring, meeting the man. I was a huge fan of
his books, and still am. I've read them and reread them, Phil
himself, however, seemed sick and depressed (probably
chronically so). Quite self-involved, as well. Of course, I met
him only a few months before he died, so he probably _was_ sick.
It was an interesting lesson for me, unfortunately borne out
many times by later experience -- an artist's work is one thing,
and the artist him- or herself something else entirely.

 >>Thomas M. Disch (the librettist of two of my operas) is no
 >>longer especially known as a science fiction writer, having
 >>outgrown the field and joined the ranks of general
 >literature.

 >"Outgrown" science fiction? Those are fighting words, dude. :)

I regress often. <smiling back>

"Outgrown" would be Tom's notion, not mine. He's quite a serious
literary writer.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                            Hall Thanks Anomalist

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:58:06 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 04:51:37 -0500
Subject: Hall Thanks Anomalist


Patrick Huyghe notified me by e-mail yesterday that The UFO
Evidence, Volume II, has won the Anomalist Book Award for 2001
in the catregory of 'Best Report'. The Anomalist is a fine
journal on anomalies and borderline science (www.anomalist.com)
co-published by Huyghe and Dennis Stacy, and I am grateful to
them for this honor.


- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:47:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 05:13:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 11:14:12 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

<snip>

 >Check the Feb MUFON Journal, I've supplied a couple of clear
 >images of just two of the more obvious anomalies. It's very easy
 >to trot out the mantra "it's nothing but balloon debris", what
 >I'd like to see is some serious thought given to explain these
 >items which are not accounted for by simple balloon and radar
 >target debris.


Neil,

I'll try to track this down. Presently I'm in the midst of
moving house & office, which is turning out to be a major
hassle. But that issue of the Journal is around here somewhere.

In the meantime, how is it that Mogul debris could so closely
resemble alleged ET debris? Never mind any asserted anomalies
for the moment.

How is that Mogul debris just happened to closely resemble
alleged ET debris within, say, two percent?

What you see in the FW pictures is what you get: flimsy material
incapable of surviving the rigors of space travel and at odds
with the miraculous properties assigned same by Marcel and
others.

You've not only been sold a bill of goods, you've bought it
hook, line and sinker.

David Rudiak (not to mention KRandle) will never forgive me for
this, but what you see in Ramey's office is the original Roswell
stuff: the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target.

The specific purpose of which, yes, was covered up.

Otherwise... that's pretty much it.


Dennis Stacy











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

             Cydonian Imperative: 01-23-02 The Martian 'Sphinx'

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 00:19:39 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 05:18:20 -0500
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 01-23-02 The Martian 'Sphinx'


The Cydonian Imperative
1-23-02

The Martian "Sphinx"...Again
by Mac Tonnies

for links and photos:

http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html


Mike Bara has posted an insightful new article on the Enterprise
Mission site that directly addresses criticisms I leveled at his
original piece, in which he claimed to have identified a
sphinx-like structure lurking near the Pathfinder landing site
(see my article on Page 22). I have no fundamental problems with
Bara's rebuttal, with the exception that I am capable of seeing
the sort of spatial differences described in his article. My
primary problem with Bara's alleged sphinx is the daunting
magnification needed to make it out; I'm simply not convinced we
are looking at "complex geometric" (i.e. artificial) shapes.

[image]

Catfight! Image courtesy Kurt Jonach.

The "sphinx" might very well be two (or more) distinct objects,
but I see no compelling reason to think they are anything than
large boulders. (And no, my reticence is not due to an aversion
to the implications of such a discovery, as Bara maintains.)
Nevertheless, Bara intelligently counters my argument that the
sphinx-feature would have necessarily succumbed to the flood
that demolished the Twin Peaks, and offers a computer-rendered
model of what he thinks he sees. And maybe he's right. But until
astronauts are able to explore the Pathfinder floodplain, I
predict the presence of a possible "sphinx" will remain
infinitely debatable.

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                      Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:05:55 -700
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:50:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

 >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads



David and List - sorry this is late. Been a busy boy the last
few days.

 >><snip>

 >>>>Brazel's interview makes it
 >>>>quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >>>>tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >>>>not available at the RAFFB.

 >>>If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
 >>>remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
 >>>two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
 >>>the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.

 >>Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
 >>weather balloons

 >How do you know that's what he had found?

In his interview with the RDR, he mentioned that he had found on
two other occasions, "weather observation balloons". His use of
the term "observation" indicates that he had at least a passing
knowledge of the typical piebald balloon used by meteorologists-
knowledge gained, no doubt, when he turned in the balloons for
the $5 reward.

 >>- not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
 >>altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
 >>Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
 >>transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
 >>consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
 >>especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
 >>brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
 >>true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

 >So you are saying a kid who has previously only seen red and
 >green balloons wouldn't recognize a balloon if it were some
 >other color?

It was not just the color. First of all, the typical piebald
weather balloon was a single envelope system. When it came down
to earth, it would land more-or-less intact. The lower part of
the NYU train of 30-odd balloons, reflectors and payload, OTOH,
was intangled in rough terrain, shredding some of the balloons
and Rawins. After a Rawin or two and the ballast had broken off,
the rest of the train flew off.

The result was small pieces of a balloon material Mac had not
encountered before - rather than a single, reasonably intact
envelope. The Rawin(s) were also beat up- ripped and broken.
This is not what he had found twice before.

 >That seems to be what you are saying. Two grown men
 >couldn't tell they had found a balloon. Blanchard at the base
 >couldn't recognize a balloon either, nor I imagine other people
 >there who probably saw the debris.

I keep in mind that the key to the whole incident was trying to
solve the mystery of the 'Flying Disks'. Like the Circleville
farmer, Marcel thought that the debris was the solution. The
question was not, then, "is this balloon material" but rather is
this what people have been seeing, and reporting, as a 'Flying
Disk'.

To answer a bit more literally - what Marcel brought in was some
shredded fragments of a balloon ("the biggest was about the size
of a basketball" - Bessie Brazel Schreiber) - not a 'complete'
balloon. It was also liberally mixed with the remains of the
Rawin. Unless you knew precisely what this came from, it would
be hard for Marcel- or anyone else - to immediately conclude
that the debris came from two separate items.

 >Incidentally, Marcel was quite familiar with electronics, being
 >a radio ham. So if there had been a radiosonde in the debris, he
 >probably would have recognized it.

Possibly - this, or the ballast, could be the mysterious 'black
box' that Cavitt is reputed to have taken back with him.

 >He had also taken a
 >month-long radar intelligence course at the end of the war and
 >one of his job titles was radar-intelligence officer. He would
 >no doubt be familiar with the foil/paper chaff used in radar
 >jamming, since part of his course involved radar
 >countermeasures.

Immaterial - No matter what he found, had it been an alien ship,
could have had an earthly analog. Again - what Marcel found was,
in his mind, the solution to the 'Flying Disk' question.

 >So here's the scenario you seem to be trying to paint. Marcel
 >comes across some obvious balloon material, but supposedly can't
 >recognize it because it is grey. He is also completely unable to
 >recognize aluminum foil laminated to paper, even though it's the
 >same stuff used in the radar chaff, or to wrap chewing gum for
 >that matter. He also apparently couldn't recognize balsa wood
 >and Scotch tape, two more "exotic" materials used to make the
 >Rawins.

 >From this he jumps to the conclusion that he must have found
 >a flying saucer.

Yep.

It was not that he couldn=92t recognize, or at least, make a
guess, on the identity of an individual piece taken out of the
context, but that as a whole, he had 'solved' the 'Flying Disk'
puzzle. And despite your treatise on Rawins in the Southwest, he
obviously did not recognize what he had as a radar target.

 >Somehow he convinces base commander Blanchard of the same thing,
 >and Blanchard, for unimaginable reasons, issues the press
 >release.

What if our intrepid Major, having 'solved' the puzzle, bypasses
Blanchard and gets Haut to write and release the news on his
(Marcel's) authority? No version of the release mentions
Blanchard, but it does identify Marcel. He also indicated to
Moore (you mention this below), that Haut had alrady leaked the
story to the press anuway.

 >Cavitt, who was with Marcel and claims he realized it
 >was a weather balloon all along, can't be bothered to ever tell
 >Marcel this, or Blanchard either. This doesn't sound like an
 >elite AF base charged with flying A-bombs -- it sounds like F
 >Troop.

 >The press release causes a press feeding frenzy that not only
 >descended on Roswell, but Gen. Ramey and the Eighth AF in Fort
 >Worth, and into the upper reaches of the Pentagon, including
 >acting Chief of Staff Vandenberg. There were going to be some
 >awfully angry generals demanding answers and some scalps for
 >such a colossal and embarrassing foul-up.

Well - it sure did catch the generals by surprise, when they
learned of the 'disk' from enquiring reporters. They were
understandably curious. But it is evident that Marcel (and C/O
Blanchard) was not punished for his enthusiasm.

 >But absolutely nothing happened afterwards. There was no
 >investigation. There were no reports written explaining what had
 >happened.

Why would there be? Ramey had investigated and discovered the
simple misidentification. Press was notified, superiors got a
good chuckle, case closed. It was a mere blip on the screen for
military people.

 >Marcel got recommissioned and year later was still on
 >the job as head of intelligence at Roswell. Both the SAC and the
 >Pentagon wanted him for higher intelligence work. The SAC wrote
 >the Pentagon they already had him in mind for a "key" position.
 >The SAC briefly made him chief of some sort of foreign air
 >intelligence division. This is a man who supposedly couldn't
 >recognize rubber balloons, chewing gum wrapper material, Scotch
 >tape, and wood used to make kid's kites.

 >As this was happening, senior officers were writing reviews of
 >Marcel. Blanchard's review the following spring and that summer
 >were the best of Marcel's career to that point. He called him
 >"highly dependable" and gave him superior ratings on his
 >ability to reach logical decisions. Does this sound like
 >somebody who couldn't identify a balloon as a balloon?

Forgive me if this is not exactly the terminology used, but:
Marcel was also ranked #3 out three command officers, and it was
noted that he sometimes tended to let his imagination get the
better of him - something to that effect. (I lost my copy of his
fitness report in last year=92s hard drive crash).

BTW - I was not a model soldier in my three year military career
- no actual crimes were committed, but I definitely was not a
candidate for a recruitment poster. But you sure would not have
known that from my fitness reports! Almost all "Outstanding".

 >Col. Dubose who indorsed Blanchard's first evaluation,
 >recommended him for Air Command and Staff School. Both Blanchard
 >and Dubose had earlier recommended his promotion to Lt. Col. in
 >the AF Reserve.

I believe it is more correct that they endorsed Marcel=92s request
for the promotion in the AF Reserve.

 >So all the officers who would have known whether Marcel had
 >screwed up are instead praising him. Ramey's statements are
 >especially telling here.

Marcel's 'screw up' was evidently not viewed as detrimental to
his career. But then, why should it? The Incident was
evidentially viewed as the efforts of a 'go-getum' officer
trying to solve the Flying Disk puzzle that had swept the nation
over the past two weeks. In any event, it is obvious that the
Incident had no lasting effect on the military. So why should
they punish anyone for the gaff?

 >It should also be pointed out that Marcel wasn't alone in
 >thinking the material was anomalous. E.g., Bill Brazel Jr.
 >reported independently the exact same physical properties as
 >Marcel for the debris fragments he found afterwards. Bill
 >Rickett, one of the CIC men in Marcel's office, spoke of the
 >thin metal material he was unable to bend. Gen. Arthur Exon said
 >he was informed of the physical properties of the material while
 >he was at Wright Field. Some of the descriptions matched those
 >of Marcel. Obviously, they wouldn't be testing an aluminum foil
 >radar target at the Wright Field labs.

 >These were just a few of the witnesses to the anomalous debris.
 >But like a typical Roswell debunker, you make it sound like this
 >was only Marcel's story.

Nope - but the tales of the other Witnesses, particularly people
like Bill Brazel, Marcel Jr,, and Bessie are interesting because
the core of their stories describe debris that matches Mac
Brazel=92s descriptions, and the stuff on Gen Ramey=92s floor.

 >>Brazel initially dismissed his find as junk.

 >Says who?

Bessie.

 >>It was only when he
 >>found out about the reward that he decided to turn it in. He
 >>also told Wilcox that his find 'looked meteorological'.

 >Well UP quoted Wilcox as claiming Brazel thought it might be a
 >"weather meter." But Brazel contradicted this statement by
 >Wilcox in his interview later that evening. According to the
 >Roswell Daily Record story, Brazel said that "'whispered kinda
 >confidential like'" to Wilcox "that he might have found a flying
 >disk." No "weather meter" here.

Of course not. Brazel was telling Wilcox about this stuff he had
found that might get him the rewards.

 >More tellingly, at the very end of the interview, he
 >categorically denied that it was a weather balloon. "Brazel said
 >that he had previously found two weather observation balloons on
 >the ranch, but that what he found this time did not in any way
 >resemble either of these. 'I am sure that what I found was not
 >any weather observation balloon.'"

And he was right.

 >So if he never though it was any sort of weather balloon, why
 >would he tell Wilcox he thought it might be a "weather meter"?
 >And why would he instead, when interviewed, claim he had told
 >Wilcox that he thought he had found a flying disk?

[fiction]

"Say Sheriff - I might have found what those folks in the papers
have been looking for - you know, a Flying Disk? Never seen
anything like this before, and it sure had been flying before it
crashed at the ranch. Kinda looks a little like a weather meter,
but you never know."

[end fiction]

 >>>And we have a farmer in Circleville, Ohio, who found a weather
 >>>balloon and Rawin target, a man who certainly never seen one
 >>>before and who was easily able to identify it for what it was.

 >>Not hard, when it had a tag identifying the manufacturer as
 >>'Case Mfc.'.

 >>>The weather balloon and Rawin targets were not so extraordinary
 >>>that they defied identification by those who had not seen those
 >>>specific items.

 >>And yet, even when there was an identifying tag on the wreckage,
 >>the farmer still turned it in as a 'Flying Disk'! Marcel did the
 >>same, although his 'disk' did not have a manufacturer's tag.

 >Immediately above, you claim Brazel thought it meteorological.
 >Now your claiming he turned it in as a flying disk. Make up your
 >mind.

See above.

 >You are also begging the question by assuming Marcel did find a
 >Rawin and turned it in as a flying disk. Maybe he found a flying
 >disk and turned it in as a flying disk.

Then again.

<snip>

 >>Well - I try not to assume anything. The available facts
 >>indicate Roswell did not require, use or have available anything
 >>resembling the material pictured on General Ramey's floor. So if
 >>Marcel transported that wreaked balloon and Rawin, then Flight 4
 >>is the only possible source in the area.

<snip>

 >The crashed
 >Mogul was supposed to be multi-balloon, multi-Rawin, remember?
 >Furthermore, the Fort Worth photos, when carefully analyzed,
 >clearly indicate that there are only the partial remains of
 >_one_ target.

 >Yet Brazel in his interview said he rolled all of the sticks and
 >foil into one bundle. If this was a Mogul, one would expect more
 >than one target in that mix, and this should be evident in some
 >way in the photos.

 >But no. There is not enough material there to account for even
 >one complete target. There are no extra sticks and no extra foil
 >panels. This was indeed the remains of _one_ target. And without
 >multiple targets, there goes a key piece of evidence that what
 >Ramey displayed came from a Mogul.

As I mentioned above, the most likely scenario has the Mogul
train drifting down with many of the balloons still intact. Once
the ballast and a Rawin or two was torn off, the remaining
balloons, and Rawin(s), ascended again and flew off. Brazel
certainly did not find a complete NYU train, just a portion of
it.

<snip>

 >Why don't you provide us with a tape of Shandera's interview so
 >Dubose's alleged statements can be independently verified. Until
 >then, it's just Shandera's word against opposing _documented_
 >statements from Dubose that are on tape or in his affidavit.

I find it curious that Shandara, who was working to prove the
UFO hypothesis, gets such short shrift from you and Kevin. I
wonder what your opinions would be of his account if he had
published the exact opposite - without supporting tapes. But
here we have a fellow that is working hard to get a different
answer from Col DuBose, and got the "wrong" answer. It is to his
credit that he published his notes anyway, even if it was
detrimental to his case.

 >>BTW- my own personal take on the answers you got was that DuBose
 >>was referring to the 'simplification' of the explanation given
 >>to the press. Whether he or anyone on Ramey's staff knew
 >>anything about Mogul is open for debate - and I think very
 >>doubtful.

<snip>

Just to repeat from the above comment - I doubt Ramey knew about
Mogul. I did not speculate about Rawins, which was your subject
of the "huge snip".

And despite your research that shows the Southwest was lousy
with Rawins, nothing you have turned up indicates that Marcel
had knowledge of them. When he found the stuff, he was intrigued
and curious "he tried to make a kite".

 >Now how could all this be (including Kirton's overly early
 >"final" identification and announcement of the special flight
 >cancellation) unless the whole thing was a set-up from the
 >beginning?

Press release hits papers - Ramey notified. Ramey talks to his
staff, and Blanchard (and/or Marcel, Cavitt, etc) via phone.
Descriptions are made, and a consensus is arrived at that it
looks like a wrecked radar target. Marcel and debris are ordered
to Ft Worth to confirm tentative identification, and to give
better credence to all future press releases.

While Ramey waits, phones are ringing off the hook. Ramey,
Kirton, and possibly others take a few of the calls and calm
some semi-hysterical reporters with the tentative
identification.

Sure the above is speculation, but it fits how intelligent men
would have handled such a situation, fits the available
evidence, and is supported by later missives from Twining and
Schulgen, who knew that the U.S. did not have any crashed alien
ships.

 >>However, they decided that it would be best if they
 >>just called it a 'weather balloon', rather then go into details
 >>about Rawins and such. That was the 'cover story' DuBose was
 >>referring to. And DuBose never claimed that there had been a
 >>switch of material.

 >>Yeah - I know, that is just an =91assumption=92. But it does fit the
 >>facts, and does not require a conspiracy. <gr>

 >Nyahh, it doesn't fit the _documented_ facts. Ramey and minions
 >and even a US Senator were identifying it as a radar target
 >before Newton's official identification, according to news
 >article of the day.

 >Furthermore, they didn't just call it a weather balloon. They
 >specifically identified it as a radar target and also used the
 >term Rawin device back in 1947. Newton did and so did Kirton
 >earlier on.

The majority of the papers carried the 'official' weather
balloon story - no mention of targets. That was the "cover story"
that DuBose was referring to.

 >>>>That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >>>>Jessies' first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >>>>'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

 >Marcel never said anything like this to Bob Pratt. The subject
 >never came up in Pratt's interview. Where did you get this false
 >tidbit?

An error on my part.

<snip>

 >>Well, Marcel - in person - repeated this initial statement in the
 >>movie 'UFOs are Real'.

 >Well, if you can speculate, I can speculate too. Suppose=85.

<snip>

Ummmm, so you are saying we have a 'confused' Marcel here?
Confused about what? And just how much of the story he told
Moore reflected this confusion?

 >On the other hand, most of what Marcel recounted in his
 >interviews tracked quite well with what can be determined from
 >his military file, news articles of the day, and interviews with
 >other witnesses. Marcel's story has a lot of corroborating
 >evidence.

Most? Pilot? Air Ace with 5 kills? Degree from Georgetown?

Final point - Maj. Marcel was not a stupid person. He was
reasonably intelligent, and a competent officer. He was also
impulsive, and had a good imagination. He simply was taken up
with the press reports of all these Flying Disks, and then
suddenly the possessor of some strange debris that he did not
recognize. He thought he had solved the mystery, and proceeded
with that assumption.


Regards,


Bruce Hutchinson











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:57:36 CST
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:54:48 -0500
Subject: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology


Further to various discussions about Keel and Coleman and Barker
in the context of the new Mothman movie, I found the following
statement by Keel quoted by Barker in The Silver Bridge (the
original book about Mothman, published in 1970). The interview
took place in 1966.

"I suspect that the UFO buffs and many of the serious
researchers like yourself have allowed themselves to be misled
and diverted by the controversies and nonsense surrounding this
subject. They've worked harder at fighting the Air Force than at
investigating UFOs. Groups like NICAP have dedicated themselves
to compiling anecdotes rather than facts. They've smothered
themselves with what seems like a hopeless cause - trying to
prove that UFOs not only exist, but that they come from outer
space. You'd think that after twenty years of vain effort they
would come to realize that the outer space answer is either
partially or is completely erroneous. It's impossible to prove,
and very little observational data supports it." (p.74)

Then, just a bit later, he adds:

"... I'm developing a gnawing suspicion that the Air Force has
been right all along - and has been telling us part of the truth
all along. After all, they've always claimed that there was no
evidence of extraterrestrial origin, and so on. If I jumped into
print with this kind of conclusion, all the buffs would scream
that I've been 'silenced' or 'bought off' or some such nonsense.
But I've got to admit that the Air Force's position makes more
sense to me every day. Maybe the government has always realized
that the 'truth' can't be proven, and that few people would
believe it anyway. So they've done the only thing they could do:
they've tried to play the whole thing down and dismiss it... The
UFO buffs keep waiting for them to land on the White House lawn.
I don't think that's ever going to happen... guys like you and I
will spend our lives running around trying to find all the
pieces to a puzzle which doesn't seem to have any definite shape
or borders."

Now, given the current state of ufology and its demise as noted by
Jenny Randles recently, are these comments from more than 35
years ago any more or any less significant?


Chris Rutkowski
Media Relations Coordinator
Public Affairs Department
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada  R3T 2N2
  voice:  (204) 474-9514
e-mail:  Chris_Rutkowski@umanitoba.ca










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 23

                     Sighting Reports From NIDS Database

From: Colm Kelleher <NIDS@lb.bcentral.com>
Date: 23 Jan 2002 19:30:06 -0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:58:29 -0500
Subject: Sighting Reports From NIDS Database


Selected Sighting Reports from the NIDS Database

NIDS is initiating a new policy of posting selected eyewitness
summaries on our web site. The summaries will be supplemented
with new cases on a regular basis. The purpose is to give the
public a broader idea of the kinds of cases we receive through
our 24-hour UFO hotline (702-798-1700) and our on-line report
form:

http://www.nidsci.org/reportform.html

NIDS has a full time staff of scientists and professional
investigators who review all new cases submitted. Investigative
resources are allocated based on multiple criteria that include
number of witnesses, assessed quality of testimony, credibility
of eyewitnesses, physical evidence etc. Further, posting our
online summaries may lead to corroborating testimony from
previously unknown witnesses to certain events.

In the Research News section of our website, you will find our
research reports concerning 'major case' investigations. This
Summaries page will contain those cases deemed less significant,
but certainly not insignificant. NIDS is able to conduct
statistical analysis by virtue of _all_ the sighting events that
are reported to us; consequently, the better reporting we have,
the more thorough research we can conduct.

In all cases possible, we use the witness's own words to
describe his or her experience. Many summaries are gained
through our online reporting form; other summaries have been
written by NIDS investigators following personal or telephone
interviews.

We begin with our first set of 20 reports, to be supplemented
periodically with additional narratives. These summaries will be
sorted according to the state or country in which the sighting
took place, and each set of new additions will be so noted when
they are posted. If you have reported a sighting to NIDS and
don't see your summary, be patient; our case load is large. Our
online reporting form is not sent directly to this section of
our website, each summary is reviewed and edited, but only to
remove identifying information that may be contained there. NIDS
takes confidentiality concerns very seriously.

If you would like to make a report or if you have any questions
about these summaries, please let us know. Be advised, however,
that we do not divulge the identities of any reporting witness.

Our contact information:

Phone: 702-798-1700
Fax: 702-798-1970
E-mail: nids@anv.net
Report: http://www.nidsci.org/reportform.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                          Secrecy News -- 01/23/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:08:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 07:36:59 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/23/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 8
January 23, 2002


**      INTERNET INFO MAY POSE SECURITY RISK
**      CLASSIFIED INFO IN THE NEWS
**      DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS ON PERU
**      SCIENCE AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM
**      POPE REFLECTS ON VALUE OF THE INTERNET


INTERNET INFO MAY POSE SECURITY RISK

Those who publish security-related information on the Internet
should consider that it may reach an "unintended audience" and
could pose a security hazard, according to an official notice
issued last week.

"Among the information available to Internet users are details
on critical infrastructures, emergency response plans and other
data of potential use to persons with criminal intent," the
National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) said in a new
advisory.

The NIPC called on "Internet content providers to review the
data they make available online" with this "potential
vulnerability" in mind.

The NIPC is a joint government and private sector entity that is
responsible for threat assessment, warning, investigation, and
response to attacks on critical infrastructures. It is located
at the headquarters of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The NIPC advisory provided a list of criteria for evaluating the
suitability of information for dissemination on the Internet,
including its utility for destructive or criminal purposes and
its availability elsewhere.

"Of course, the NIPC remains mindful that, when viewing
information access from a security point of view, the advantages
of posting certain information could outweigh the risks of doing
so," the notice said.

See the January 17 NIPC advisory here:

http://www.nipc.gov/warnings/advisories/2002/02-001.htm


CLASSIFIED INFO IN THE NEWS

Information that is nominally "classified" continues to appear
with some frequency in the mainstream media. Here are some of
the latest examples:

"The history of Iranian collusion with Hezbollah ... is
described in secret intelligence reports provided to The New
York Times by intelligence officials," wrote James Risen in a
January 17 NY Times story based in part on the secret documents.
See "U.S. Traces Iran's Ties to Terror Through a Lebanese":

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/17/international/middleeast/17INT
E.html

Efforts by the Central Intelligence Agency to cultivate
informants among Iranian Americans in Los Angeles were described
in the Los Angeles Times on January 15 (and promptly reported
the next day in the Tehran Times).

Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet personally
intervened to ask the LA Times not to publish the story.  But
the Times stood firm.

See "CIA Looks to Los Angeles for Would-Be Iranian Spies" by
Greg Miller:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-000003859jan15.story

Another Los Angeles Times story on January 22 reported that "The
National Reconnaissance Office in Chantilly, Va. ... will need 1
million more square feet within the next four years." See "Flood
of Wartime Spending Keeps Nation's Capital Flush With Capital"
by Johanna Neuman:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-000005659jan22.story

The case that too much information is classified is easy to
make. Even Pentagon Secretary Donald Rumsfeld conceded
yesterday, while defending the handling of military detainees in
Guantanamo, that U.S. interests might have been better served by
disclosing more information, not less.

Rumsfeld said that a published photograph of a kneeling, hooded
prisoner in Guantanamo had been misinterpreted as evidence of a
human rights violation. But a reporter suggested that it would
have been harder to misinterpret if more information about the
detainees and conditions at the site had been made available.

"Maybe. Yeah. That's fair," Rumsfeld replied.

See excerpts from the January 22 Pentagon press briefing on the
detainees here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/dod012202.html


DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS ON PERU

A new compilation of declassified documents on human rights
abuses and political violence in Peru has just been published by
the National Security Archive.

The compilation, prepared by Archive analyst Tamara Feinstein,
complements the collection of Peru-related documents released
earlier this month by the U.S. Embassy in Peru.

Aside from the considerable intrinsic interest of the documents
themselves, and the light they shed on U.S.-Peru relations, the
new compilation also illustrates some awkward truths about
national security classification and declassification policy.

The Archive collection, viewed alongside the recent U.S. Embassy
release, makes it possible to compare and contrast what has been
considered classified and declassified at different points in
time.

In a few cases, the U.S. Embassy this month actually withheld
information that had previously been released to the Archive
under the FOIA. In many other cases, close examination of the
newly declassified information suggests that much of it should
never have been classified in the first place.

"It's a wonderful object lesson in the subjectivity of most
government secrecy," said Archive director Tom Blanton.

See the National Security Archive release here:

http://www.nsarchive.org/news/20020122/


SCIENCE AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM

"Do you have an idea that would help US Military Special
Operation Forces? America needs your help!"

That is the pitch to scientists from the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency and U.S. Special Operations Command in
the latest initiative to harness science and technology for the
war against terrorism.

DARPA and SOCOM are hosting a by-invitation only conference in
March called "Scientists Helping America" to explore innovative
approaches to a variety of military needs from signature
reduction to directed energy weapons.

See the conference announcement and application information
here:

http://safe.sysplan.com/scihelpamerica/ad.html

Paradoxically, however, the whole effort to "harness" science
toward the solution of a specific problem may be
counterproductive, writes physician Siddhartha Mukherjee in The
New Republic.

The problem with this kind of programmatic, targeted research,
he says, "isn't only that it may be more expensive; it's that it
leaves little room for a critical feature of the discovery
process: serendipity."

Instead, it might be far more efficient, Mukherjee writes
suggestively, to amply fund basic science and let the practical
results emerge as they will.

"The point is that scientific discoveries often happen when they
are least expected. Disparate nodes in knowledge are
inexplicably connected through secret passages. And the danger
is that a post-September 11 focus on programmatic research might
demolish this Looking Glass universe," writes Mukherjee.

See "Fighting Chance" by Siddhartha Mukherjee in The New
Republic (11/19/01):

http://www.tnr.com/012102/mukherjee012102.html


POPE REFLECTS ON VALUE OF THE INTERNET

Pope John Paul II discussed the uses and disadvantages of the
Internet for advancing the mission of the Church in a statement
issued by the Vatican this week.

"The Internet radically redefines a person's psychological
relationship to time and space," the Pope stated. "Attention is
riveted on what is tangible, useful, instantly available; the
stimulus for deeper thought and reflection may be lacking."

"Yet human beings have a vital need for time and inner quiet to
ponder and examine life and its mysteries, and to grow gradually
into a mature dominion of themselves and of the world around
them."

"Understanding and wisdom are the fruit of a contemplative eye
upon the world, and do not come from a mere accumulation of
facts, no matter how interesting," he said.

The Pope's message "Internet: A New Forum for Proclaiming the
Gospel" is dated January 24. It is posted on the Vatican web
site here (see under "World Communications Day, 2002"):

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to majordomo@lists.fas.org with
this command in the body of the message:
subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:  www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:07:09 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 07:39:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Rudiak


 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:47:26 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >In the meantime, how is it that Mogul debris could so closely
 >resemble alleged ET debris? Never mind any asserted anomalies
 >for the moment.

 >How is that Mogul debris just happened to closely resemble
 >alleged ET debris within, say, two percent?

 >What you see in the FW pictures is what you get: flimsy material
 >incapable of surviving the rigors of space travel and at odds
 >with the miraculous properties assigned same by Marcel and
 >others.

 >You've not only been sold a bill of goods, you've bought it
 >hook, line and sinker.

 >David Rudiak (not to mention KRandle) will never forgive me for
 >this, but what you see in Ramey's office is the original Roswell
 >stuff: the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target.

 >The specific purpose of which, yes, was covered up.

 >Otherwise... that's pretty much it.

If it was the remains of a singular balloon and rawin target
(which it is), then how do you arrive at the conclusion that it
came from a multi-target, multi-balloon Mogul?

I have posed this question to you before and have gotten no
answer. What is it that clearly links this debris to Mogul?

The flawed logic is something like this: Birds have feathers;
ducks have feathers; therefore the feathers come from a duck. If
birds in general have feathers, then how do you know these
feathers come from a duck? Where's the webbed feet?

Computer analysis shows that exactly one radar target is in the
photos. The exact number of triangle panels making up the target
are there and the stick lengths add up to almost exactly what
was used in making the targets. There is no excess material in
the photos, as would be expected if this truly came from more
than one radar target.

Furthermore Brazel in his Roswell Daily Record interview
indicated that he rolled _all_ the stick and foil material into
_one_ bundle. If there had been more than one radar target, it
all would have gotten mixed together. Excess material would have
shown up in the photos -- extra sticks, extra foil panels. But
they aren't there.

If they had set aside some additional debris that isn't shown in
the pictures, then you have to explain how they managed to get
the amount of debris for the radar target almost exactly right.
That was sensational bookkeeping on their part, especially from
intelligence officers who allegedly had no knowledge of radar
targets.

Another thing about this radar target when closely examined--it
looks very, very clean. The white paper backing has no dirt on
it, There are no water stains. There had been a few thunder
storms during the month in central N.M. since Mogul #4 was
launched. Where is the expected evidence of weathering in this
radar target?

The obvious conclusion is that they started with exactly one
radar target. That explains in easily the most economical
fashion why the radar target debris is accounted for by exactly
one target, and not one iota more.

As for the clean target, this is suggestive that it was off the
shelf from somewhere, or if it was from a real crashed target,
it hadn't lain on the ground all that long, certainly not a
Mogul month. There wasn't time for it to weather.

Now let's move on to the balloon material. I've calculated the
approximate volume of the displayed balloon, and it could all
fit into a shoebox. Although this hasn't been firmly established
yet, the material probably can all be accounted for by a
standard-sized 350 gram weather balloon used to loft radiosondes
or Rawin targets.

What happened to the rest of those 2 dozen Mogul balloons?

Furthermore, Brazel said in his interview that the material was
in "strips" which he gathered up into a bundle. But the material
in the photos looks relatively intact, as if it came from one
balloon. Where are all the strips?

The material also shows stretch marks, and the way it is piled
on the floor also gives it the appearance of still having
elasticity. A neoprene balloon left in the desert sun for 2 to 3
weeks, much less a month, would have deteriorated to the point
of brittleness, as Charles Moore of Mogul has demonstrated many
times. It breaks up into flakes, not "rubber strips", and
resembles paper ash, not a still elastic balloon.

As for the darkening, the neoprene balloons darkened very
quickly in the sun. Bob Galganski e-mailed me the results of an
experiment he had done with some neoprene balloon material. In
only 5 hours it had turned from its pristine milky white color
to a darkish brown. His photos were quite dramatic. And if you
read Charley Moore's AF interview and affidavit, he speaks of
the balloons turning dark in only a few days. It doesn't require
a month in the sun.

So what the Ramey material appears to be is a singular balloon
in a still intact, elastic condition. Since the balloons
darkened very rapidly, this would suggest a balloon that has
weathered, but probably for only a few days at most. A month-old
balloon would not look like this. It would be in tatters by
then.

Such a balloon could come from anywhere. Hundreds were sent up
everyday from weather stations all over the country. All it
would take would be for one person to turn one in admidst the
national saucer hysteria, and that would account for the balloon
in the photo. You don't need a Mogul recovery.

Here's another interesting balloon item hot off the presses,
prompted by the recent debate over so-called anomalous debris.
Neil Morris e-mailed a scan of an area at Marcel's feet in the
"Marcel facing right" photo, at the right edge of the balloon.
This was the so-called "cable structure." There is indeed a
"cable," but I interpret it as a more mundane piece of balloon
twine obviously tied to the end of the balloon. Once you know
where to look, even more of it can be seen in the Newton photo.
Neil is to be congratulated for noticing this.

I certainly don't find this to be anomalous, but it is very
interesting. Why? Because Mack Brazel in that same RDR interview
was quoted as saying, "No strings or wire were to be found..."
Yet here's balloon twine tied to the one and only balloon on
display. It's hard to understand how Brazel could have missed
it. This is but one inconsistency between Brazel's account and
what was on display in Ramey's office.

Let's recap. There is only one radar target and one balloon in
the Fort Worth photos. As Ramey himself was quoted by United
Press early on as saying, it was "the remnants of _A_ weather
and _A_ radar reflector." All accounts from Fort Worth were of a
singular balloon and target, including the FBI telegram.

This is very hard to reconcile with a multi-balloon,
multi-target Mogul recovery, even neglecting the physical
condition of the debris, which is also inconsistent.

However, it is very easy to explain if they brought in a single
balloon and a single target as a shill for the "real" stuff, as
Marcel and Dubose said happened. What can be seen in the Fort
Worth photos corroborates the testimony of both Marcel and
Dubose. It does _not_ support a Mogul recovery.

If it was a single balloon and target, there would be _nothing_
to set it apart from an ordinary Rawin weather balloon and no
conceivable reason to protect the "specific purpose" of Mogul.
How could anyone even tell it was from a Mogul?

Newton's ID would indeed have been final, and there would have
been no need for the special flight to Wright Field, as Ramey
and minions announced to the press. Yet the FBI was told that
Wright Field disagreed with that assessment, and the debris was
being shipped to Wright Field after all.

Why would Wright Field disagree and why would further
identification be needed? There is deafening silence from the
debunkers on these points, but inquiring minds want to know.

It's time to start answering some hard questions instead of
evading them.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 4

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 21:51:55 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 07:55:24 -0500
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 7 Number 4


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 7, Number 4
January 22, 2002
Editor: Joseph Trainor


ALIEN SKULL DISCOVERED IN BULGARIA?


Leyla Degirmen, UFO Roundup correspondent in the Balkans, has
come across a strange story in the Turkish newspaper Milliyet,
which stated that an alien skull was found last May in southern
Bulgaria.

"On May 21, 2001, a villager found an unusual skull on Rodolp
Mountain in Bulgaria," somewhere near Ardino and Madan, about
200 kilometers (120 miles) south of Sofia, the national capital.

"Some scientists held a meeting in Asenovgrad. Prof. Yordan
Yordanov, one of the best-known anthropologists in Europe,
claimed that he had never seen a human or an animal skull like
this in his life. Katya Melamet, one of the archaeologists at
the Bulgarian Science Academy, has also told that she has never
seen anything like this."

"The story of the villager is also very interesting," Leyla
writes, "He claimed that he had seen five people, with yellow
metallic clothes, in his dream. They told the villager to go to
the area on the 21st of May, and when he went there, he found
the skull and a (small) elliptical metal object."

"The skull is (weighs) about 250 grams and has six holes in it
to (which apparently) belong to the senses. The skull also has
no mouth hole."

"This summary is from an article published in Milliyet on
January 4, 2002."

"I thought it is a very important discovery, but the strange
thing is that I cannot find the source of this information, or
any other news related to it, no matter how hard I try. Milliyet
is a leading newspaper in Turkey, and they have been very
reliable for over thirty years."

Asenovgrad is a city located 100 kilometers (60 miles) southeast
of Sofia, Bulgaria. (See Milliyet for January 4, 2002. Many
thanks to Leyla Degirmen for this report.) (Editor's Comment:
Another "now you see it, now you don't" newspaper story, eh? It
could be a hoax. Or maybe somebody tampered with Milliyet's
website. It's unlikely that aliens buried one of their own in
the rugged Rodolpi range. Could it be that the aliens were
bushwhacked by military units operating in the area during World
War II, and a dead alien was hastily buried there? Perhaps more
of our readers in southeastern Europe can contribute additional
information.)

CYLINDRICAL UFO SIGHTED IN SOUTHERN SPAIN


"On Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 3:15 p.m., a UFO was seen by a
multitude of drivers along Sevilla's (a.k.a. Seville--J.T.) Ruta
(Route) S-30 in the vicinity of Montequinto."

"The UFO was cylindrical in shape, with two whitish lights on
its 'bow' and its 'stern,' respectively. Its overall aspect was
metallic and wingless. There was only a protuberance on its
nose," which gave it the appearance of the fuselage of a
Concorde. "Two further protuberances were also seen on its aft
section."

"It travelled in a constant direction towards downtown Sevilla
and, although the sky was overcast, it flew at such a low
altitude that it was clearly visible. Its size was considered to
be roughly that of a twin-propeller (twin-rotor) military
helicopter."

(See Anos Luz for January 9, 2002, "Multiple sightings over
Sevilla." Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros
Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico, y tambien
Jose Antonio Roldan y Manuel Bautista para esas informaciones.)

AN UNUSUAL UFO DISPLAY IN NORTH YORKSHIRE, UK

Peter M. and his family "live in the village of South Stainley,
near Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England. While lying in bed at
12:30 a.m. on Friday, January 18, 2002--the curtains were drawn
back--my attention was drawn to what I initially thought was a
very bright star in a southwesterly direction. After looking at
it for a couple of minutes, I realized it was moving slightly
and seemed to be pulsating."

"I went downstairs to get my binoculars to have a better look.
What I saw I find very hard to come to terms with. It appeared
to be a long tube of linked rings of various colours which was
expanding and contracting lengthwise. It then converted to a
single line of short lines of different colours, which appeared
to be 'hinged' at equal spacing. The 'line' then started forming
a vast array of different shapes at fantastic speed. Apart from
zigzagging up and down, it also formed oval and circular shapes
and, believe it or not, a heart shape."

"This must have been quite a considerable distance away as,
looking at it with the naked eye, it appeared as just a bright
light. And, while watching it, I didn't have to move the
binoculars to keep it in the picture. I watched the object for
almost an hour as it slowly moved past my field of view."

"I made a point of looking for it again at 12:30 a.m. this
morning," Saturday, January 19, 2002, "and went outside to see
if I could get a better view. The same object was in
approximately the same position performing exactly the same,
though I didn't see the tubular shape I saw the night before."

"Then I noticed some similar lights at various points in the sky
around my house, and when I focused on them, they were doing
exactly the same thing. Some were not as bright, obviously being
at a greater distance, but one I could see from the side of my
house," facing east, "that was about the same as the original
one. They all appeared to be more or less static (stationary in
the USA--J.T.) in the sky, apart from the movement while making
shapes, which was constant." (Email Interview)

UFO FLAP FOCUS SWITCHES TO CUERNAVACA, MEXICO

Mexico's UFO flap continued last week in the state of Morelos,
with most of the action taking place in and around the city of
Cuernavaca.

On Sunday, January 13, 2002, "a spherical UFO of great size was
seen by more than a dozen people over a hospital in the city of
Cuernavaca. The UFO hovered at a low altitude. Finally, the UFO
turned transparent and then vanished completely and could no
longer be seen."

That same evening, around midnight, "two luminous spheres were
seen by 10 eyewitnesses in la colonia Santa Rosa Xochiac, a
small village in the Los Leones desert," southwest of Mexico
City, the national capital.

"The two strange objects emitted much light and hovered at a low
altitude over some trees, sending off vibrations that rattled
windows in some of the houses in the zone. Afterward, there was
an intense thunderstorm that extended all throughout the
(desert) valley."

On Monday, January 14, 2002, at 8 a.m., "a tubular UFO was seen
by five witnesses in Ajusco, to the south of Mexico City. They
described it as 'a cylindrical UFO of a metallic aspect, which
hovered over the mountains overlooking Ajusco and was seen by
motorists driving (north) into the Distrito Federal."

"On Monday, January 14, 2002, at 3:30 p.m., "a disc-shaped
object with a dome on the top was seen by airline personnel at
Mexico City's international airport. Witnesses described 'a
strange object of metallic appearance in the sky over the
capital.'" (See NotiOVNI for January 20, 2002. Muchas gracias a
Daniel Munoz y Alfonso Salazar para esas noticias.)

LUMINOUS UFO VIDEOTAPED JUST WEST OF BRASILIA

On Sunday, December 23, 2001, "a UFO was filmed by a TV crew
near Brasilia," the capital of Brazil. "They were returning from
a work-related trip to Goiania, the capital of the state of
Goias."

"According to the witnesses," and to the videotape images seen
by investigating Brazilian ufologists, "the object was real
round and was shiny. It was yellow-colored. By the camera, you
could see details that were not seen by the naked eye, such as
some sparkles on the top of the object."

"According to the cameraman that we interviewed, at the moment
the light came over the highway, they stopped the car and began
to film it."

The camera crew then "called CINDACTA (Brazil's NORAD--J.T.) to
tell them what they were seeing, and a few minutes later, two
commercial aircraft passed close to the object. The object made
impossible movements" that no conventional aircraft could make
"and made no sound."

The videotape was analyzed by Ricardo Varela, director of
imaging for the Brazilian Entity for Extraterrestrial Research
(EBE-ET) The witnesses were interviewed by Roberto Beck and
Thiago Luiz Tichetti of EBE-ET. (Muito obrigado a Thiago Luiz
Tichetti por esas informacoes.) (Editor's Comment: South America
is having a major UFO flap this week. There's more to come, so
stay tuned.)

UFO FLAP BREAKS OUT IN COLOMBIA

On Sunday, January 6, 2002, at 11:30 p.m., dozens of residents
of Tabio, a town in the Pena de Huaila region of Colombia,
"spotted the approach of a great light on the horizon, followed
by several smaller lights. The (lead) UFO, changing its shape,
was captured by a hand-held video camera, and the image is
excellent."

The Tabio videotape was broadcast on Canal (Channel) Caracol on
RCN-TV in Bogota, the national capital.

The following day, Monday, January 7, 2002, at 8:05 a.m., "a
luminous ovoid object appeared and hovered at an altitude of 500
meters (1,650 feet) and was seen both by laborers in Tabio and
campesinos (farmhands) in Pena de Huaila."

On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, "at 10:30 a.m., in the village
of Timiza, near Bogota, a gigantic luminous object approached
and flew over the village and caused such excitement that the
mayor and several residents telephoned Organizacion Contacto
OVNI (Spanish for UFO Contact Organization--J.T.) in the
capital."(Muchas gracias a William Chavez y Roberto Gomez del
Organizacion Contacto OVNI para esas noticias.)

CYLINDRICAL UFO HOVERS NEAR CALAMA, CHILE

On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, "residents of the El Loa region
saw an enigmatic and cylindrical light at a certain distance
from Calama," a town in northern Chile that has been the
location of UFO and Chupacabra incidents for the past two years.

"According to eyewitness accounts, the distance did not allow
for a detailed view of the light. Therefore it could be fairly
described as an unidentified flying object or UFO," reported
Calama ufologist Jaime Ferrer.

"'The fact is that I don't know what it really was. It could
have been a weather balloon or something else, but it looked
very strange,' said a resident, who was heading towards
Chuquicamata at that time of day."

Chile's Oficina de Aeronautica Civil (OAC) in Antofagasta, the
nearest large city, pointed out that their airport radar sets
"picked up nothing at the time in question."

"'Generally, people notify us when sightings of this type take
place. But this time we received no reports of anything
unusual,' explained Renzi Jara, manager of the El Loa (regional)
airport." (Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Jaime Ferrer del
Centro OVNI de Calama (Spanish for UFO Center of Calama--J.T.)
para esas noticias.)

FATHER, DAUGHTER SEE A GREEN UFO IN WEST VIRGINIA

A spherical green UFO was seen flying at a low altitude in
August 2001 over Milton, West Virginia (population 3,500), a
town on Interstate Highway I-64 approximately 36 miles (57
kilometers) west of Charleston, the state capital.

Darren E., age 41, reports, "My daughter and I saw a green ball
fly right through our home town. It flew over the stop light (on
the main street--J.T.) In fact, we only have two stop lights in
the town. It was daylight. What a sight!"

"I was on a pay phone out in town. The booth is attached to the
building. While I was walking to my truck, I watched this dull
green ball fly across in front of me. It was 3 p.m. I was about
100 yards (97 meters) away. It was about 40 or 50 feet (12 or 15
meters) off the ground. It was right above the power lines so I
could see it clearly. The green ball never had a smoke trail or
anything. It just went across my home town like it knew its way
around."

"My little girl Dara just froze in amazement. I'm 41 and my
daughter is 14. A friend of my family was talking about it also.
It flew out of sight after about 30 seconds' time." (Email
Interview)

FIERY SPHEROID UFO SIGHTED IN PEARLAND, TEXAS

"Some Pearland residents are still scratching their heads after
spotting a strange object in the sky Sunday," January 6, 2002.
"But was it a UFO?"

Pearland, Tex. (population 18,700) is located on Highway 35
about 15 miles (25 kilometers) south of Houston.

"There is a mystery unfolding in Pearland. But it may be awhile
before this one involving a 'fire in the sky' is solved."

"Rocky Flint captured the image Sunday afternoon with his video
recorder in Pearland. It appears to be a burning object in the
sky. His wife, Cynthia, says it was hard to miss."

"'It resembled a floating fireball,' she said."

In the video, "the fiery ball appears to remain stationary for
several minutes before moving downward and then disappearing.
Mrs. Flint said she had no idea what she was witnessing."

"'There's nothing to describe what it was. It's so unique and so
different. I've never in my whole life seen anything like it.'
she said."

"Eyewitness News made calls to both (Houston's international)
airport and anyone who could shed any light on the thing. The
Brazoria County Sheriff's Department also received many calls,
but they couldn't find anything. Flint's husband has his own
theory."

"'He couldn't believe what he was seeing. He said it looked like
a UFO,'" Cynthia said.

"Before Sunday, Mrs. Flint didn't believe in UFOs. 'I'm not a
big believer of them. But I can't describe what I saw up there,
either.'" (See the KTRK-TV website for January 7, 2002, "UFO
sighting? Mystery object caught on tape." Many thanks to Gerry
Lovell of Far Shores for this story.)

ANCIENT SUNKEN CITY FOUND
OFF THE COAST OF INDIA

"Remains of a prehistoric civilization from 7,500 B.C. have been found in
the sea off the west coast of India."
The remains were found just off the coast of Surat, in western India,
"discovered 40 meters below the surface of the sea," about 9 kilometers (5
miles) from shore.
"Archaeologists found the pieces of wood, remains of pots, fossil bones and
what appears to be construction material."
"'Clearly this is the work of a human civilization. They found a patio, a
stairway, public baths and the ruins of a temple,' said Muril Manohar
Joshi, India's Minister of Human Resources. 'It appears to be a
civilization of the Harappan type but much, much older, flourishing in
7,500 B.C. It is much older than the cities of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro (in
Pakistan--J.T.), two cities which reached their pinnacle in 3,000 B.C.'"
"The archaeological discovery was the joint work of two Indian
institutes--the Institute of Archaeology and the Institute of Oceanic
Studies. The ruins were found in the Gulf of Cambay, in the Arabian Sea,
just off the coast of the state of Gujarat."
"Also discovered at the site were urns filled with human bones and
fossilized teeth. Carbon dating of wood samples produced the estimated date
of 7,500 B.C. The prehistoric city was located on the shores of a river,
which is now a gully in the seabed about 9 kilometers (5 miles) from shore."
"'We have formed a study group that will ask profound questions about this
mysterious civilization and in which epoch this culture disappeared,' Joshi
said."
Surat is located about 250 kilometers (150 miles) north of Mumbai (Bombay),
the largest city in western India. (See The Hindustan Times for January 16,
2002 and USA Today for January 17, 2002, "Find in India suggests ancient
city.")
(Editor's Comment: So much for the quaint notion that civilization
originated in Sumeria (modern Iraq) in 3,500 B.C. This is the third
discovery of ancient ruins and artifacts from 7,000 B.C., the Hyborian Age
or "age undreamed of" by Texas author Robert E. Howard (1906-1936) The
sunken city might even be the "Ayodhya" that Howard wrote about in Weird
Tales. This is the story in which the wizards of the Black Circle kidnapped
Yasmina Devi and turned her into their private nautch girl at their ashram
"deep in the Himelias" (Himalayas--J.T.) Then Conan arrived and started
"the Mother of All Jihads" by attacking the ashram and slicing up anybody
who even looked like an intiate. You know, some day UFO Roundup will have
to do a feature story on Bobby Howard's siesta dream in San Antonio in 1932
and the strange birth of "Conan of Cimmeria.")


"IT WAS MANY AND MANY A YEAR AGO, IN A KINGDOM BY THE SEA..."

In Baltimore, Maryland, "a small crowd gathered at the old
church where Edgar Allan Poe lies buried, waiting, as they do
every year, for the arrival of a stranger."

"A black-clad man arrived at 2:59 a.m. Saturday," January 19,
2002, "marking the poet's birthday with the traditional
graveside tribute: three red roses and a half bottle of cognac.
Only this and nothing more."

"It is a rite that has been carried out by a mysterious stranger
every January 19 since 1949, a century after Poe drank himself
to death in Baltimore at age 40."

"Jeff Jerome, curator of the Edgar Allan Poe House and Museum,
and 15 invited guests watched from inside the church."

"The three roses represent Poe, his wife and his Aunt Maria
Clemm, who are buried beneath the newer monument."

"The cognac is a mystery, Jerome has said, because there are no
prominent references to it in Poe's works." (Editor's Comment:
Maybe a half-bottle of cognac was found near Poe's body when he
died in 1849.)

"A prolific poet and critic, Poe wrote comedies, detective
stories and tales of the macabre, including The Fall of the
House of Usher, The Pit and the Pendulum and The Telltale
Heart." (See the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune for January 20,
2002, "Poe cloaked in mystery, even in death," page 8A.)
(Editor's Comment: The Poe House, located at 123 North Amity
Street in Baltimore, is the most haunted house in Maryland,
displaying the most uncanny phenomena conceivable over the
years. People have been known to go insane just stepping into
the front room. But nothing is quite so strange as the
continuing mystery of the Man in Black who visits the poet's
grave every year. If you must visit the Poe House...whatever
you do, don't pet the raven!)


  From the UFO Files...

1913: MYSTERIOUS AIRSHIP SPOTTED OVER WALES

During the first two decades of the Twentieth Century, there
were a number of strange "airship" or UFO flaps. They took
place in the USA, UK, Italy, Germany and New Zealand. In 1913,
UK, in particular, was visited by a number of "dark airships."
Here's a case from Wales.

"On 17 January (1913) at 4:45 p.m., Capt. L. Lindsay, Chief
Constable of Glamorganshire (Wales) saw an airship flying over
Cardiff, creating 'a dense volume of smoke.'" Lindsay "noted it
was much bigger and faster than the locally-built Willows
airship."

"Half an hour later," at 5:15 p.m., "Steven Morgan saw a similar
ship, trailing smoke, over Merthyr, 30 miles (48 kilometers)
away--a very high speed for airships of the era." (See UFO: The
Complete Sightings by Peter Brookesmith, Barnes & Noble Inc.,
New York, N.Y., 1995, page 28.)

That's it for this week. Join us next time for more UFO,
Fortean 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 2002 by Masinaigan Productions, all
rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup
on their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the
newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue in
which the news item first appeared.


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 UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine, plus
archives of Filer's Files, Oz Files, and UFO News 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

             Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:34:05 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 07:59:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:57:36 CST
 >Subject: Quote From John Keel About 'Current Ufology'

 >Further to various discussions about Keel and Coleman and Barker
 >in the context of the new Mothman movie, I found the following
 >statement by Keel quoted by Barker in The Silver Bridge (the
 >original book about Mothman, published in 1970). The interview
 >took place in 1966.

 >"I suspect that the UFO buffs and many of the serious
 >researchers like yourself have allowed themselves to be misled
 >and diverted by the controversies and nonsense surrounding this
 >subject. They've worked harder at fighting the Air Force than at
 >investigating UFOs. Groups like NICAP have dedicated themselves
 >to compiling anecdotes rather than facts. They've smothered
 >themselves with what seems like a hopeless cause - trying to
 >prove that UFOs not only exist, but that they come from outer
 >space. You'd think that after twenty years of vain effort they
 >would come to realize that the outer space answer is either
 >partially or is completely erroneous. It's impossible to prove,
 >and very little observational data supports it." (p.74)

 >Then, just a bit later, he adds:

 >"... I'm developing a gnawing suspicion that the Air Force has
 >been right all along - and has been telling us part of the truth
 >all along. After all, they've always claimed that there was no
 >evidence of extraterrestrial origin, and so on. If I jumped into
 >print with this kind of conclusion, all the buffs would scream
 >that I've been 'silenced' or 'bought off' or some such nonsense.
 >But I've got to admit that the Air Force's position makes more
 >sense to me every day. Maybe the government has always realized
 >that the 'truth' can't be proven, and that few people would
 >believe it anyway. So they've done the only thing they could do:
 >they've tried to play the whole thing down and dismiss it... The
 >UFO buffs keep waiting for them to land on the White House lawn.
 >I don't think that's ever going to happen... guys like you and I
 >will spend our lives running around trying to find all the
 >pieces to a puzzle which doesn't seem to have any definite shape
 >or borders."

 >Now, given the current state of ufology and its demise as noted by
 >Jenny Randles recently, are these comments from more than 35
 >years ago any more or any less significant?


Chris,

No. They are just more B.S. from "Crazy John" with whom I once
had a confrontation in the NICAP office. He was just back from
an area of West Virginia where he had been mucking around, and
was ranting at me about how bad and inept our NICAP personnel
were there. I distinctly remember saying to him, "John, you are
full of s___; we don't even have any personnel there!" We only
"compiled anecdotes?" That is highly amusing coming from
storyteller John who obviously has not read The UFO Evidence or
other NICAP reports, but who has contributed heavily to "UFO
mythology.".


- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                         Messrs. Mortellaro & Velez

From: Moderator <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:33:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:33:44 -0500
Subject: Messrs. Mortellaro & Velez


The discussions between Messrs. Mortellaro & Velez over the
years have been revealing - positions stated and re-stated.


'Its All There In Black & White'

A search within the Archive for "Velez" + "Mortellaro" - using
Steve Goodman's excellent search-engine, 'Google' - popped 249
instances, as of the last 'crawl' by search-bots.

To conserve bandwith, VSN MBs and unless either party has
something new to add, I suggest both parties ignore each other's
posts.


Gentlemen, time will tell.....


Errol Bruce-Knapp - Moderator
UFO UpDates - Toronto








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:50:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:54:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 13:39:26 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >List,

 >Well, it's official! Hell has finally frozen over! Dennis Stacy
 >and I are in 100% agreement on something.

 >Snap some photos for your grandkids, because this historic event
 >won't last long. Satan's weather officer predicts a return to
 >normal temperatures within a day or two.


David,

Would you believe it was 71 degrees here when I took my kid to
school at 7:45 in the morning?

What has the world come to?

According to the weatherman, though, another cold front is
supposed to blow in tomorrow. They tell us we may get down
to... 35.

Shortly thereafter, or a year later - whichever comes first - I
expect you to admit that what was pictured on Ramey's floor is
what came from Roswell, indeed, is what Brazel, Marcel and
company originally recovered.

Now _that_ will be a cold day in Hades.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                       Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:36:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:58:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:05:55 -700
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

<snip>

 >Most? Pilot? Air Ace with 5 kills? Degree from Georgetown?

That either/or fallacy is a cancer of the first water isn't it?
It'll even contribute to the invalidation of your calmly
implemented if not well reasoned argument for the... ah,
'justification' of the extreme prosaic... destroy it utterly.
<g>.

By extension of a similar logic, _either_you_ are a sincere
proponent of the merely prosaic because you are an intellectual
coward oblivious to a reality made plain in history, quality
anecdote, films and movies, and quality work, _or_ you know the
obvious truth and calmly front for the aggregate forces of
institutional darkess out of sociopathic meanspiritedness...
which? I'm sure you would argue for some third alternative?
"Either/or" usually has a hole in it, wouldn't you agree?

So, _either_ Marcel was a liar and his saucer story was a
confabulation, OR he was not a liar and he was just mistaken in
his analysis prompted by childish imagination... Marcel can be
'demonstrated' to be a 'liar' so the investigation itself is an
exercise in futility, and by extension indicative of the
futility of _any_ investigation as regards UFOs... Cut to the
chase.

My imagination might be a _little_ more well honed given the
professionally social shunning I've experienced for rational
views over the last few years, but it seems to me that there is
a profusion, a plethora, and a panoply of _ready_ choices,
related and unrelated, to the two white bread neo-historical
tick turds you trot out here regarding Roswell and its cast of
players.

Go back to the basics, dude. Something 'exceptional' is
_occurring_, forgetting Roswell, and the mainstream refuses to
look for it! This situation has not changed in fifty years, has
been one muffled and unfocused neo-investigative boondoggle
after another that whole time, and is a contested area with an
army of prosaic contrarians - such as yourself, seemingly. Is
your reluctance, if that's what it is, to consider the less than
prosaic kept alive by trepidation of the approaching unknown?
That's a dentist's office visit better put behind you, if it is.

 >Final point - Maj. Marcel was not a stupid person. He was
 >reasonably intelligent, and a competent officer. He was also
 >impulsive, and had a good imagination. He simply was taken up
 >with the press reports of all these Flying Disks, and then
 >suddenly the possessor of some strange debris that he did not
 >recognize. He thought he had solved the mystery, and proceeded
 >with that assumption.

I sense that you want us all to breath the same sigh of relief
that you seem to demonstrate, that we are alone in this universe
for all practical purposes, and that we are beholden, then, to
naught but man and God... I think you intellectually short
change humanity, while giving it too much ideosycncratic credit
at the same time. There's more to heaven and Earth than your too
casually applied 'either/or' of convenient philosophy can
account for, sir. A lot more.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com


~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                    Re: Hall Thanks Anomalist - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 19:54:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 11:14:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Hall Thanks Anomalist - Maccabee


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Hall Thanks Anomalist
 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:58:06 +0000


 >Patrick Huyghe notified me by e-mail yesterday that The UFO
 >Evidence, Volume II, has won the Anomalist Book Award for 2001
 >in the catregory of 'Best Report'. The Anomalist is a fine
 >journal on anomalies and borderline science (www.anomalist.com)
 >co-published by Huyghe and Dennis Stacy, and I am grateful to
 >them for this honor.


Congratulations on being the Top Anomalist.

Does that also make you the Chief Anomaly?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                   UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey

From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 21:42:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 11:16:57 -0500
Subject: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey


Dear List:

In 2002, two Great UFO/ET Congresses will occur on April 6 & 7
and October 12 & 13, 2002 at the Days Inn, Rt. #206 & NJ
Turnpike Exit #7 near Bordentown, NJ. Speakers confirmed for the
April event, thus far include:

White Eagle - Will discuss Native American teachings, traditions
and rituals concerning the origin of Man, Starnacee, our
ancestors from the Pleiades and Orion star systems, the island
of Adom/Atlantis, Evelandia, the Garden of Eden, Builders of
Ancient Egypt & South America, hidden cities of the South West,
Ancient American prophecies, the Crystal Skull, the UFO
connection, and return to Earth Mother.

Rosemary Ellen Guiley - author of several books on the
paranormal will discuss Vampires from Outerspace, exploration of
the common ground shared by the Vampire Myth, ET's and the
Archetype of Death.

Antonio Huneeus - A columnist for FATE magazine, will give an
illustrative, visual presentation on recent UFO evidence from
Spain, Italy, Hungary and a host of other nations. Antonio has
published the only article concerning the Mussolini UFO
documents. The full story of these "X Files" from the Italian
Fascist era of the 1930's, where secret documents describe
"unconventional air mobiles" will be revealed. This and much
more European info was obtained from the International UFO
Symposium of 2001 in the Republic of San Marino (located in
central Italy) where he recently returned from lecturing. He has
also spoke at previous symposiums held there and recently spoke
at the Budapest, Hungary International UFO Congress and he was
presented there with an award. He will describe UFO reports by
Police witnesses and others and he will have film to show.

Patrick Huyghe - Co-editor of the Anomalist and author of
several books will discuss his recent UFO research and books.

For more information such as a schedule of talks and costs,
please contact Pat. J. Marcattilio at: 221 Joan Terrace,
Hamilton Township, New Jersey 08629, or phone (609)631-8955
between 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., or email your snail mail
address to: sparkle@earthlink.net and a flyer, when finished,
will be mailed to you. Additional speakers will be posted to
this List when confirmed.


Tom Benson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:36:04 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:50:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Gates


 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:47:26 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

  Neil,

<snip>

 >How is that Mogul debris just happened to closely resemble
 >alleged ET debris within, say, two percent?

 >What you see in the FW pictures is what you get: flimsy material
 >incapable of surviving the rigors of space travel and at odds
 >with the miraculous properties assigned same by Marcel and
 >others.

 >You've not only been sold a bill of goods, you've bought it
 >hook, line and sinker.

 >David Rudiak (not to mention KRandle) will never forgive me for
 >this, but what you see in Ramey's office is the original Roswell
 >stuff: the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target.

Dennis,

May I make an observation here. What I see in the photos appears
to be balloon/target debris. In your post you suggest that it is
"the original Roswell stuff." How do you, or I know for a fact
that the material laying in Ramey's office was in fact the
original stuff that came from Roswell. In fact this stuff
(ballon/target material) could have come from most anywhere from
base supply.

The facts would seem to indicate that at that date and time, in
Rameys office a ballon/target was troted out for what we would
call today "a photo op" that was designed to get the press off
of everybodys back.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                        Re: Roswell Threads - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:16:16 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:55:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Morris


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:05:55 -700
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

 >>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:37:01 EST
 >>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 19:23:21 -700
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >David and List - sorry this is late. Been a busy boy the last
 >few days.

 >>><snip>

 >>>>>Brazel's interview makes it
 >>>>>quite obvious that Marcel was not familiar with a Rawin ("he
 >>>>>tried to make a kite"), another good indicator that Rawins were
 >>>>>not available at the RAFFB.

 >>>>If we are going to accept this at face value, then we must also
 >>>>remember that Brazel said that he had found weather devices on
 >>>>two other occasions and this was nothing like those... except
 >>>>the weather balloon and Rawin would have been just like those.

 >>>Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
 >>>weather balloons

 >>How do you know that's what he had found?

 >In his interview with the RDR, he mentioned that he had found on
 >two other occasions, "weather observation balloons". His use of
 >the term "observation" indicates that he had at least a passing
 >knowledge of the typical piebald balloon used by meteorologists-
 >knowledge gained, no doubt, when he turned in the balloons for
 >the $5 reward.

 >>>- not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
 >>>altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
 >>>Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
 >>>transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
 >>>consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
 >>>especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
 >>>brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
 >>>true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

 >>So you are saying a kid who has previously only seen red and
 >>green balloons wouldn't recognize a balloon if it were some
 >>other color?

 >It was not just the color. First of all, the typical piebald
 >weather balloon was a single envelope system. When it came down
 >to earth, it would land more-or-less intact. The lower part of
 >the NYU train of 30-odd balloons, reflectors and payload, OTOH,
 >was intangled in rough terrain, shredding some of the balloons
 >and Rawins. After a Rawin or two and the ballast had broken off,
 >the rest of the train flew off.

 >>The result was small pieces of a balloon material Mac had not
 >encountered before - rather than a single, reasonably intact
 >envelope. The Rawin(s) were also beat up- ripped and broken.
 >This is not what he had found twice before.

Hi All,

Can I jump in here and make an observation, the original
argument above revolved around the phrase "he tried to make a
kite with it" ie Mack saying that Marcel tried to piece together
a kite structure with the debris (presumably the foil/stick
stuff).

But then doesn't a fully assembled ML307 radar target strike a
marked resemblance to a _box_ _kite_?.

In other words do we have here an indicator that Marcel _was_
aware of the ML307 and in fact the other target types in use
then that also bore some resemblance to kite like structures,
and he was taking this point into account as he inspected the
debris?.

 >>That seems to be what you are saying. Two grown men
 >>couldn't tell they had found a balloon. Blanchard at the base
 >>couldn't recognize a balloon either, nor I imagine other people
 >>there who probably saw the debris.

 >I keep in mind that the key to the whole incident was trying to
 >solve the mystery of the 'Flying Disks'. Like the Circleville
 >farmer, Marcel thought that the debris was the solution. The
 >question was not, then, "is this balloon material" but rather is
 >this what people have been seeing, and reporting, as a 'Flying
 >Disk'.

 >To answer a bit more literally - what Marcel brought in was some
 >shredded fragments of a balloon ("the biggest was about the size
 >of a basketball" - Bessie Brazel Schreiber) - not a 'complete'
 >balloon. It was also liberally mixed with the remains of the
 >Rawin. Unless you knew precisely what this came from, it would
 >be hard for Marcel- or anyone else - to immediately conclude
 >that the debris came from two separate items.

This above debris description is highly selective and therefore
very incomplete ie, Mack Brazel, prior to the involvement of
RAAF had described some of the debris to Sheriff Wilcox as being
_mainly_ foil-like with one piece of debris singled out as being
the size of the Sheriff's safe which was given as aprox
4'x3'x3', this account related to UP wireservices by one of
Wilcox's deputies on the afternoon of the 8th July.

 >>Incidentally, Marcel was quite familiar with electronics, being
 >>a radio ham. So if there had been a radiosonde in the debris, he
 >>probably would have recognized it.

 >Possibly - this, or the ballast, could be the mysterious 'black
 >box' that Cavitt is reputed to have taken back with him.

The ballast tanks appear to have been bright orange in colour
as seen in surviving colour footage of the NYU/MOGUL launches, they
also carried "danger" signs as kerosene was one of the ballasts
used.

 >>He had also taken a
 >>month-long radar intelligence course at the end of the war and
 >>one of his job titles was radar-intelligence officer. He would
 >>no doubt be familiar with the foil/paper chaff used in radar
 >>jamming, since part of his course involved radar
 >>countermeasures.

 >Immaterial - No matter what he found, had it been an alien ship,
 >could have had an earthly analog. Again - what Marcel found was,
 >in his mind, the solution to the 'Flying Disk' question.

This is a rather sweeping and dismissive statement and not
supported by his apparent actions, ie the point I made above re
the "kite" and he also asked his son Jesse Jnr to keep an eye
open for any electronic components spotted when he called home
en-route to RAAF with some of the debris and the pair looked
through a couple of boxes of the stuff in the Marcel's kitchen.
These appear to be rather the actions of a man _checking_ the
debris against and for, known earthly parameters.

<snip>

 >What if our intrepid Major, having 'solved' the puzzle, bypasses
 >Blanchard and gets Haut to write and release the news on his
 >(Marcel's) authority? No version of the release mentions
 >Blanchard, but it does identify Marcel. He also indicated to
 >Moore (you mention this below), that Haut had alrady leaked the
 >story to the press anuway.

If he'd have done that ie issue a public statement unapproved
and over the head of his commander he would have found himself
in exceedingly deep do-do, that was totally against protocol.

There is also testimony from Blanchard's friends at the time in
Roswell that Blanchard did confirm to them  _he_ issued the
release.

<snip>

 >>The crashed
 >>Mogul was supposed to be multi-balloon, multi-Rawin, remember?
 >>Furthermore, the Fort Worth photos, when carefully analyzed,
 >>clearly indicate that there are only the partial remains of
 >>_one_ target.

There are photographs of NYU/MOGUL launches where the number of
ML307's used varies from 1 ->5, Charles Moore suggested 3 might
have been used on the Flt4 launch, it seems a good working
guess.

As for the FW debris, remember Marcel states much debris was
still left on the B29 flown from RAAF and that much more debris
was still left out at the site, I think the quote is something
along the lines of they (Marcel/Cavitt) only recovered a portion
of it and a greater part of it was still left behind.

 >>Yet Brazel in his interview said he rolled all of the sticks and
 >>foil into one bundle. If this was a Mogul, one would expect more
 >>than one target in that mix, and this should be evident in some
 >>way in the photos.

 >>But no. There is not enough material there to account for even
 >>one complete target. There are no extra sticks and no extra foil
 >>panels. This was indeed the remains of _one_ target. And without
 >>multiple targets, there goes a key piece of evidence that what
 >>Ramey displayed came from a Mogul.

 >As I mentioned above, the most likely scenario has the Mogul
 >train drifting down with many of the balloons still intact. Once
 >the ballast and a Rawin or two was torn off, the remaining
 >balloons, and Rawin(s), ascended again and flew off. Brazel
 >certainly did not find a complete NYU train, just a portion of
 >it.

The point is I think, there is _too_ _much_ debris for it to
have been any of the NYU launches. Calculating the amount of
material required, even for a "light dusting" of debris to cover
the various descriptions of the debris field, including that
given by Mack in the same RDR article we get the rolled up
bundle of sticks story, show far more debris would be required
than what was available in any NYU balloon train, remember the
piece of debris Mack mentioned to Wilcox as reported on UP, foil
like and 4'x3'x3' that's a large amount of material, plus you
still have to have further quantities of debris spread over the
site at a sufficient density to pick it out as a defined area.

There was only a very finite amount of foil and envelope
material available overall in a single NYU balloon launch

<snip>

 >>Now how could all this be (including Kirton's overly early
 >>"final" identification and announcement of the special flight
 >>cancellation) unless the whole thing was a set-up from the
 >>beginning?

 >Press release hits papers - Ramey notified. Ramey talks to his
 >staff, and Blanchard (and/or Marcel, Cavitt, etc) via phone.
 >Descriptions are made, and a consensus is arrived at that it
 >looks like a wrecked radar target. Marcel and debris are ordered
 >to Ft Worth to confirm tentative identification, and to give
 >better credence to all future press releases.

 >While Ramey waits, phones are ringing off the hook. Ramey,
 >Kirton, and possibly others take a few of the calls and calm
 >some semi-hysterical reporters with the tentative
 >identification.

 >Sure the above is speculation, but it fits how intelligent men
 >would have handled such a situation, fits the available
 >evidence, and is supported by later missives from Twining and
 >Schulgen, who knew that the U.S. did not have any crashed alien
 >ships.

Recently found press quotes from Ramey do not support the above.
They indicate the debris was shipped to FWAAF and it was
inspected there and that the FWAAF staff were unable to identify
it. See my posting of this Reuters press release in my post to
David Rudiak earlier in this thread..

<snip>

 >Final point - Maj. Marcel was not a stupid person. He was
 >reasonably intelligent, and a competent officer. He was also
 >impulsive, and had a good imagination. He simply was taken up
 >with the press reports of all these Flying Disks, and then
 >suddenly the possessor of some strange debris that he did not
 >recognize. He thought he had solved the mystery, and proceeded
 >with that assumption.

Marcel was also not in charge of RAAF and as such it would not
have been his decision to pursue the matter that, at the end of
the day that would have been Blanchard's call, presumably after
some consultation with Jennings his deputy base commander.


Marcel was only one cog in a bigger machine.

Neil









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

             Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:08:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 13:01:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:34:05 +0000


 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:57:36 CST
 >>Subject: Quote From John Keel About 'Current Ufology'

 >>Further to various discussions about Keel and Coleman and Barker
 >>in the context of the new Mothman movie, I found the following
 >>statement by Keel quoted by Barker in The Silver Bridge (the
 >>original book about Mothman, published in 1970). The interview
 >>took place in 1966.

 >>"I suspect that the UFO buffs and many of the serious
 >>researchers like yourself have allowed themselves to be misled
 >>and diverted by the controversies and nonsense surrounding this
 >>subject. They've worked harder at fighting the Air Force than at
 >>investigating UFOs. Groups like NICAP have dedicated themselves
 >>to compiling anecdotes rather than facts. They've smothered
 >>themselves with what seems like a hopeless cause - trying to
 >>prove that UFOs not only exist, but that they come from outer
 >>space. You'd think that after twenty years of vain effort they
 >>would come to realize that the outer space answer is either
 >>partially or is completely erroneous. It's impossible to prove,
 >>and very little observational data supports it." (p.74)

 >>"... I'm developing a gnawing suspicion that the Air Force has
 >>been right all along - and has been telling us part of the truth
 >>all along. After all, they've always claimed that there was no
 >>evidence of extraterrestrial origin, and so on. If I jumped into
 >>print with this kind of conclusion, all the buffs would scream
 >>that I've been 'silenced' or 'bought off' or some such nonsense.
 >>But I've got to admit that the Air Force's position makes more
 >>sense to me every day."

 >>Now, given the current state of ufology and its demise as noted by
 >>Jenny Randles recently, are these comments from more than 35
 >>years ago any more or any less significant?

 >No. They are just more B.S. from "Crazy John" with whom I once
 >had a confrontation in the NICAP office. He was just back from
 >an area of West Virginia where he had been mucking around, and
 >was ranting at me about how bad and inept our NICAP personnel
 >were there. I distinctly remember saying to him, "John, you are
 >full of s___; we don't even have any personnel there!" We only
 >"compiled anecdotes?" That is highly amusing coming from
 >storyteller John who obviously has not read The UFO Evidence or
 >other NICAP reports, but who has contributed heavily to "UFO
 >mythology.".

As someone intimately familiar, from long experience and
exposure, with Keel's writings, methods, and personality, I
agree completely with Dick. To be blunt about it, I'm shocked
that Chris, for whom I have the greatest respect, represents
John Keel as a rational critic of ufology. Apparently it needs
to be pointed out that Keel has long sought to replace sober
investigation and theory with wild-eyed occult notions for which
zero supporting evidence exists and which, if widely accepted by
ufologists, would put UFO study so far out on the margins that
it might as well be a distant galaxy.

If you think demons are responsible for UFO and other anomalous
phenomena, or that this is at least a respectable, arguable
hypothesis, then John Keel is your man. If you think science and
reason are more likely than demonology to get to the bottom of
the mystery someday, then Keel is just another of the colorful
eccentrics - maybe, very roughly speaking, a kind of latterday
George Hunt Williamson - who have wandered through saucer
culture over the decades.

It is amusing, though typical, that Keel is accusing _others_ of
"compiling anecdotes." Like most people, I've always read Keel
for the anecdotes he relates so entertainingly. (Is there a
more entertaining Fortean book than The Mothman Prophecies?
Well, okay, Fort's books themselves, but aside from those....)
For real UFO scholarship and research, however, I go to works
like Dick's UFO Evidence II and to the excellent field reports
NICAP investigators prepared from thorough inquiries into
individual cases.


Jerry Clark








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                          http://www.wikipedia.com/

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@INSYNC.NET>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:53:39 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:03:08 -0500
Subject: http://www.wikipedia.com/

Folks,

Here's an interesting idea about presenting the best of our
solid UFO evidence to a wider audience. Wikipedia is a free
online Encyclopedia that is gaining some broad exposure. Anyone
can contribute articles. I would suggest that the cream of our
researcher group consider contributing some solid overview
articles on the UFO topic to this effort, so that folks using
the encyclopedia will find some decent overview information
instead of the usual garbage, or nothing at all.

See the encyclopedia's website at:

http://www.wikipedia.com

if you think you might have something to contribute.

-Brian Cuthbertson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 24

                      Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:59:35 -700
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:05:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:07:09 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:47:26 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 ><snip>

 >>David Rudiak (not to mention KRandle) will never forgive me for
 >>this, but what you see in Ramey's office is the original Roswell
 >>stuff: the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target.

 >>The specific purpose of which, yes, was covered up.

 >>Otherwise... that's pretty much it.

 >If it was the remains of a singular balloon and rawin target
 >(which it is), then how do you arrive at the conclusion that it
 >came from a multi-target, multi-balloon Mogul?

I covered this in another post, but elaboration on that answer
seems to be required.

The NYU/Mogul array fully deployed was over 600ft in height. It
consisted of 28 balloons, with a large, heavy lift balloon at
the top. Attached below, were the many smaller balloons, which
increased the lift capacity, and added stability to the train.
At the bottom was the payload and the Rawins.

Some 7-10 days after the launch of Flight 4, the effects of
sunlight finally started to have an effect, and some balloons
started rupturing. This caused a change in the equilibrium, and
the train started drifting back to earth. When it finally
touched down, most of the balloons were still intact.

The train sagged to the ground until sufficient weight was
relieved from the system for the remaining balloons to stay
aloft. Wind dragged the train over the ground, mangling the
Rawins, until it became entangled in rocks and brush. The winds
were strong enough to strain the connections between an
entangled Rawin and the train to cause a line to let go. With
the ratio of lift capacity to weight now in a positive state,
the remaining balloons could now rise again. The train flew off,
leaving behind the shredded Rawin, some fragments of burst
balloons, and possibly the ballast and/or transponder that
Cavitt reportedly recovered.

<snip>

 >Such a balloon could come from anywhere. Hundreds were sent up
 >everyday from weather stations all over the country. All it
 >would take would be for one person to turn one in admidst the
 >national saucer hysteria, and that would account for the balloon
 >in the photo. You don't need a Mogul recovery.

The majority of balloons launched in the late forties were
weather observation systems that were tracked optically. These
'piebald' balloons were pigmented for easy tracking. The
material used on flight four was not pigmented. But even today,
sightings of balloons account for significant number of UFO
reports.

Even Mac had recovered piebald balloons in the past. But these
past recoveries had not included foil and sticks. It was not the
balloon material that made the debris unusual, it was the Rawin.


Regards,


Bruce Hutchinson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                 Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:46:42 -0800
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 07:59:13 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey


 >From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey
 >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 21:42:57 -0500

 >Dear List:

 >In 2002, two Great UFO/ET Congresses will occur on April 6 & 7
 >and October 12 & 13, 2002 at the Days Inn, Rt. #206 & NJ
 >Turnpike Exit #7 near Bordentown, NJ. Speakers confirmed for the
 >April event, thus far include:

Hello, all.

<snip>

I snipped the whole lot, not unashamedly, but with the
satisfaction of popping a zit, a zit on the body of ufology. I
know some of us may share some sympathies with the views to be
expressed but here is my opinion: In the expressed interest in
accuracy, truth, and scientific effort that needs to be the
formost effort in figuring out just what the heck _is_ going on.
Not some proclimations of peace, love and space vampires.

Just how are we to verify some of the claims made. If these
folks have direct communication, ok fine let's see it. I mean
the Trafalmadorian Aerial Demonstration Team preforming over the
Bordentown Days Inn.

I get so tired of the New Age (it really isn't new) and I know
the press is going to have a field day with this. I can't wait
to see some media type interveiwing some fake native American or
fakir/guru talking about the space brothers as if he or she has
high tea with them at 4:00 pm each day. Of course the media type
will have the usual X-files or some such music for the theme of
the piece. Then when there is say, a Bruce Maccabee or a Richard
Hall or a Stan Friedman in town, the media type wonders where
the greasepaint and rubber noses are. No such thing as a serious
reasearcher is there - nuyk nuyk nuyk.


Oh well.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:51:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:02:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:36:04 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Dennis,

 >May I make an observation here. What I see in the photos appears
 >to be balloon/target debris. In your post you suggest that it is
 >"the original Roswell stuff." How do you, or I know for a fact
 >that the material laying in Ramey's office was in fact the
 >original stuff that came from Roswell. In fact this stuff
 >(ballon/target material) could have come from most anywhere from
 >base supply.

 >The facts would seem to indicate that at that date and time, in
 >Rameys office a ballon/target was troted out for what we would
 >call today "a photo op" that was designed to get the press off
 >of everybodys back.


Robert,

The trouble with trying to think and talk about Roswell is that
almost every researcher has a different Roswell in mind. When
Researcher A talks about Roswell, he or she might have in mind a
Roswell that involved multiple objects and crash sites, alien
bodies, a massive recovery and cover-up, and who knows what
else. Researcher B's Roswell might be a minimalist one, with the
Foster ranch debris field, no fire engines nor bodies, but one
with a press conference in Fort Worth at which a weather balloon
was substituted for the real debris. And so on.

If the real Roswell would simply stand up and step forward, life
would be much easier. But it's obvious at this point that that
ain't gonna happen - at least to everyone's satisfaction.

It has to be said (and I realize this isn't a popular position)
that part of the blame for the confusing picture we have needs
to be laid at the feet of the original writers on the subject.
All sorts of spurious testimony crept into the arena that never
should have been allowed in in the first place.

In their defense, though, this is the way research proceeds: two
steps forward and one step back. But it's a little bit like the
correction of the front page headline that gets buried on page
16 of the next day's paper: too little, too late. The end result
is that there are a lot more Roswells running around out there
than there should have been.

One thing I have never "liked" about even the bare bones Roswell
is the paucity of variety in the debris described. At the most
we're talking about four or five types - beams, foil, maybe some
threads and some Bakelite-like stuff. This does not like a
spaceship sound.

Admittedly, a comparison to known terrestrial technology might
not be the soundest approach, but it's the only one we have.
Imagine, if you can, a B-1 or B-2 bomber coming apart overhead.
You would literally find hundreds, if not thousands, of
different types of debris, not to mention body parts.

Maybe at some point in the distant future flying machines get
vastly simpler, rather than more complex, from what we have
today -- I just can't bring myself to imagine how. Nor can I
wrap my mind around the presumed assumption that material
capable of surviving space travel would somehow come apart so
completely as is usually described by Roswell witnesses,
typically without mention of scorch or fire marks. Depending, of
course, on which particular Roswell you're referring to.

This is why I personally have no problem applying Occam's Razor
and subscribing to the most minimal Roswell of them all -
Project Mogul. Whether one agrees or not, Mogul was in the area,
could have come down on the Foster ranch, could have been what
was recovered, shipped to Fort Worth, and photographed on
Ramey's floor. It's simple, neat, and straightforward, with no
need of cover ups, switching of material, and vast conspiracies.

How can I explain all the anecdotal testimony that argues
otherwise? That's easy, too. I can't. But I can't explain why
Glenn Dennis is still sticking to his nurse story, either - nor,
indeed, why he came up with it in the first place.

Finally, there's the 'what if' test. What if we had really
recovered the remains of an extraterrestrial spaceship near
Roswell in 1947? Would history have played out the way it has? I
think the argument can be made that it wouldn't have - that
there would be visible footprints in both government and
military policy at large that I just don't see any convincing
evidence of.

By way of but one large example, I don't think the Cold War
would have unfolded as it did had we actually had knowledge of a
spaceship from another planet as early as 1947. But that's
another e-mail.

In the meantime, that's my Roswell, and I'm sticking to it.

Everyone else is welcome to theirs. Bodies and all.


Dennis Stacy









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

             Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:35:10 CST
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:08:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology -


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:08:26 -0600
 >UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology
 >>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:34:05 +0000

 >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:57:36 CST
 >>>Subject: Quote From John Keel About 'Current Ufology'


 >>>Further to various discussions about Keel and Coleman and Barker
 >>>in the context of the new Mothman movie, I found the following
 >>>statement by Keel quoted by Barker in The Silver Bridge (the
 >>>original book about Mothman, published in 1970). The interview
 >>>took place in 1966.

 >>>"I suspect that the UFO buffs and many of the serious
 >>>researchers like yourself have allowed themselves to be misled
 >>>and diverted by the controversies and nonsense surrounding this
 >>>subject.

<snip>

(But I believe we would have to concede this point.)

 >>>Now, given the current state of ufology and its demise as noted by
 >>>Jenny Randles recently, are these comments from more than 35
 >>>years ago any more or any less significant?

 >>No. They are just more B.S. from "Crazy John" with whom I once
 >>had a confrontation in the NICAP office. He was just back from
 >>an area of West Virginia where he had been mucking around, and
 >>was ranting at me about how bad and inept our NICAP personnel
 >>were there. I distinctly remember saying to him, "John, you are
 >>full of s___; we don't even have any personnel there!" We only
 >>"compiled anecdotes?" That is highly amusing coming from
 >>storyteller John who obviously has not read The UFO Evidence or
 >>other NICAP reports, but who has contributed heavily to "UFO
 >>mythology.".

 >As someone intimately familiar, from long experience and exposure,
 >with Keel's writings, methods, and personality, I agree completely with
 >Dick. To be blunt about it, I'm shocked that Chris, for whom I have
 >the greatest respect, represents John Keel as a rational critic of
 >ufology.

That's funny, I don't recall describing Keel as such. I thought
my post was quite clear. I simply found the quote within The
Silver Bridge, a volume much in demand today with the release of
the Mothman movie, and asked the question of its relevance to
ufology today, whether it was either more or less significant.

To be blunt, I'm shocked that Jerry is shocked, especially since
my true views on ufology have been well-advanced on Updates and
elsewhere. I'm disappointed by his reaction.

 >It is amusing, though typical, that Keel is accusing _others_ of
 >"compiling anecdotes." Like most people, I've always read Keel for
 >the anecdotes he relates so entertainingly. (Is there a more entertaining
 >Fortean book than The Mothman Prophecies? Well, okay, Fort's
 >books themselves, but aside from those....)

My other point was actually to show that The Silver Bridge is
the book more closely aligned with the movie's sensational
approach, rather than Keel's later work.

 >For real UFO scholarship and research, however, I go to works like
 >Dick's UFO Evidence II and to the excellent field reports NICAP
 >investigators prepared from thorough inquiries into individual cases.

I'd have to agree. It's the books and articles about serious and
thorough case investigation which are the foundation of ufology.


With some concern and puzzlement, I remain,

Chris Rutkowski










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                            'Bonafide' Abductees?

From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:14:35 -0500
Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?


Whom and what determines if an abductee is 'bonafide'? I'm not
trying to be confrontational since I consider myself a cog in
that wheel.

All of these discussions about scientific research and
statistics are based on the assumption that those being studied
are, without a doubt, abductees.

How is it possible to determine this?

I have the utmost respect for those that have tackled this
dilemma.

I always get a giggle when I read that "49% of abductees feel
such-and-such" - many of the abductees I know do not talk to
_anyone_ (researchers included). Are these considered
'self-proclaimed' abductees? Perhaps...

Does having a researcher investigate your case and declare you
"real" make it so? I'd be interested in hearing what others
think...


Michelle Guerin









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                    Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads]

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 23:02:08 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:44:01 -0500
Subject: Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads]


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:59:35 -700
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:07:09 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 17:47:26 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>David Rudiak (not to mention KRandle) will never forgive me for
 >>>this, but what you see in Ramey's office is the original Roswell
 >>>stuff: the remains of a weather balloon and rawin target.

 >>>The specific purpose of which, yes, was covered up.

 >>>Otherwise... that's pretty much it.

 >>If it was the remains of a singular balloon and rawin target
 >>(which it is), then how do you arrive at the conclusion that it
 >>came from a multi-target, multi-balloon Mogul?

Throughout this, notice that Bruce Hutchinson does not explain
how exactly only one radar target and one balloon ended up in
the Fort Worth photos. Furthermore, as explained below, his
hypothesis requires the finding of obvious payload equipment
along with any radar target. But there is no such items in the
photos and Ramey in 1947 denied the finding of any
instrumentation. Such equipment also was _not_ described by any
of the primary men in the field, namely Brazel, Marcel, and
Cavitt. The closest thing to any sort of payload was Cavitt's
"black box" described by Marcel.

The standard Mogul scenario also requires the presence of paper
parachutes, the alleged explanation for Marcel's
"parchment-like" material. Again, there is nothing like this in
the photos. But since this is part of the standard Mogul
debunking hypothesis, we require a Mogul balloon that carried
them, as explained more clearly below.

 >The NYU/Mogul array fully deployed was over 600ft in height. It
 >consisted of 28 balloons, with a large, heavy lift balloon at
 >the top. Attached below, were the many smaller balloons, which
 >increased the lift capacity, and added stability to the train.
 >At the bottom was the payload and the Rawins.

This is strictly an assumption as to the configuration, since
there is no surviving technical documentation of Flight #4. This
is very convenient, since Roswell debunkers can then mold Flight
#4 into anything they want it to be, such as definitely carrying
radar targets and paper parachutes, items in reality that were
rarely used on the Mogul flights. This assumed configuration is
also based strictly on the 40+ year old memories and assumptions
of one man, Charles Moore of Mogul, and we will see more clearly
later how much Moore's assumptions, not facts, have driven the
Mogul hypothesis.

But let's play along. The balloon configuration Bruce is
describing above is a composite of Flight #2, launched from
Bethlehem Penn. about 10 days before and Flight #5, launched the
day after Flight #4 from Alamogordo.

Engineering schematics for both flights exist. Flight #5 shows 3
larger lifter balloons at the top and 25 smaller balloons
forming the major balloon train strung out in a line below.
That's Bruce's assumed 28 balloons.

Flight #2 had two larger lifter balloons at the top followed by
21 smaller balloons below. That's only 23 balloons, but not a
concern.

Flight #5, however, shows no paper parachutes, only 1 silk one,
and _no_ radar targets. It is Flight #2 that shows 3 targets and
4 of the paper 'chutes. Since the Mogul hypothesis requires both
items to properly debunk Marcel's description of debris, it
would seem Flight #2 would be the best model configuration, not
Flight #5, sans targets and chutes.

The complete Flight 2 balloon train consisted of the following
items: 2 larger lifter balloons at the top, a paper chute below
and a cutoff device just below that, to cut loose the larger
lifter balloons at 35,000'. Immediately below this were the 21
smaller 350 gram meteorological balloons and another cutoff
device to cut loose 3 more of these balloons at 45000'. Finally
came three radar targets, followed by three paper chutes, a
radiosonde with batteries, a sonobuoy microphone payload with
shroud rings, and at the very bottom was ballast and altitude
control equipment. The ballast/altitude control was cut loose on
descent by another cutoff device directly above (this factoid
also enters into the discussion below).

This is the Mogul balloon configuration that comes closest to
how Moore _assumes_ Flight 4 must have been configured,
including the radar targets and paper parachutes. Note that all
of this is a reconstruction, since Moore actually has no direct
memory of Flight 4, relying almost entirely on a brief entry in
a diary by one of the main Mogul people.

 >Some 7-10 days after the launch of Flight 4,

No doubt meaning 7-10 hours after launch. After 7 to 10 days,
Flight 4 would have ended up somewhere in Europe or Asia.

A 7 to 10 hour flight time is another of those unsupported,
undocumented assumptions by Charles Moore needed to get his
little lost Mogul up as far as Brazel's place, also making all
sorts of assumptions about wind speeds and direction, balloon
rise rates, altitudes, launch time, and other "fudge" factors
required by Moore to create the necessary trajectory. Jiggle
these assumptions even a little bit and Flight #4 could just as
well have dropped on Col. Blanchard's head at Roswell, as Flight
#5 nearly did the next day.

Just to show you how arbitrary this flight time is, surviving
flight summaries of the early Mogul neoprene balloon flights
show _none_ of these flights lasted this long. That's right,
none! The closest was Flight 7, the last of the neoprene balloon
series, which lasted 413 minutes, just under 7 hours. Flight 5,
interestingly listed as "the first successful flight carrying a
heavy load," lasted 343 minutes, or under 6 hours. (Hence can we
conclude Flight 4 wasn't successful and didn't stay aloft as
long as Moore _assumes_?) Flight 6, however, lasted only 166';
#1 only 115'; #A only 70'; #B only 31'.

So how did Moore come up with a flight time of as much as 10
hours? The problem Moore faced was getting the neoprene balloons
to stay up much longer than any of them actually did so that he
could get his little lost Mogul up to Brazel's place. What would
happen is that they would deteriorate in the sun, get brittle in
the cold, and generally pop after a few hours. Thus Moore had to
get rid of the sun for at least a few more hours to retard
deterioration.

How do you do that? Well it's real easy kiddies when there is no
documentation to directly contradict any story you spin for
Flight 4. What you do is assume the launch time was in the wee
hours of the morning instead of sunrise like most Mogul flights,
and which had been Moore's previous story of the launch time for
a number of years. Moore seems to "remember" and assume just
whatever he needs to make Mogul 4 work.

Now launching a Mogul at 2:00 in the morning instead of 5:00
(Moore's previous "memory" or assumption) doesn't make a lot of
sense, especially this very first N.M. flight, since visual
tracking of the balloons through theodolites was an important
component of tracking during the first few hours of flight, and
you can't track visually in the middle of the night. So another
of Moore's assumptions is that they didn't need visual tracking
because they had a radiosonde and radar reflectors for tracking
as well, even those these remained untested in the new setting
of N.M.

See how easy it is to make Flight 4 work if you just assume
whatever you need to make it work? Oddly Moore's calculation of
a Flight 4 trajectory is treated as "scientific" by the
unthinking skeptical community because he uses those mystical
things called "numbers." What generally goes unnoticed is that
Moore has been shamelessly cooking the books.

I have gone into great and gory detail on this because Roswell
debunkers like Bruce just uncritically repeat the debunking
party line without thinking or caring about all the hidden
assumptions behind all this. They instead repeat Charley Moore's
version of events, instead of acknowledging Moore keeps changing
his "memories" of what happened and assuming all sorts of things
that are completely undocumented and based largely on wishful
thinking.

Below we will also see how the myth of the multiple radar
targets in Ramey's office also came directly from Charley Moore.

 >the effects of
 >sunlight finally started to have an effect, and some balloons
 >started rupturing.

Hence the need for Moore to arbitrarily move the Flight 4 launch
time back to 2:00 am. Got to get rid of that sunlight and keep
the balloons up there longer.

 >This caused a change in the equilibrium, and
 >the train started drifting back to earth. When it finally
 >touched down, most of the balloons were still intact.

Again, how could Bruce Hutchison possibly know that "most" of
the balloons were still intact? Yet another assumption
apparently based on psychic abilities. Most of the balloons
probably popped or deflated before ever touching down,
especially if up there for Moore's needed "7 to 10" hours.

 >The train sagged to the ground until sufficient weight was
 >relieved from the system for the remaining balloons to stay
 >aloft. Wind dragged the train over the ground, mangling the
 >Rawins, until it became entangled in rocks and brush.

Now here's a _real_ important point and one the debunkers keep
sweeping under the rug. Notice those _multiple_ Rawins being
dragged along the ground and "mangled." There should be pieces
rom all those targets on the ground -- right?

Fast forward to Brazel's Roswell Daily Record interview. They
quote him as saying, "When the debris was gathered up the
tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet
long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle
about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick."

In other words, those multiple, mangled targets would have been
all rolled up together into one bundle.

When you unpack that bundle in Fort Worth for photos, there
should be some evidence of multiple targets all mixed up into
one bundle -- right? -- extra framework sticks and extra
triangular foil panels used to make the targets.

In fact, an article of faith in the debunking community is that
the photos do show more than one target. Karl Pflock in his
recently published book presents this as if were a proven fact
(p. 164): "Finally, the photographs of the debris taken in Gen.
Ramey's office _unquestionably_ show the remains of _more than
one_ ML-307B radar target and _several_ degraded neoprene
sounding balloons.

It's not just thrown up there as a proposition. According to
Pflock, the subject is "unquestionable." Case closed.

Now can you guess who Pflock cites as his reference for this
"unquestionable fact"? Why yes, the omnipresent, all-knowing,
infallible Charles Moore. Moore wrote it in a letter to Robert
Todd in 1992 and A.F. lead debunker and counterintelligence
agent Col. Richard Weaver in 1994. Moore's an expert on Mogul so
it must be true -- right?

How did Moore determine there was more than one radar target in
the photos? He must have done a careful analysis -- right? Well,
no, all he did was eyeball the photos and declare there was more
than one target there. E.g., in his A.F. interview, he was again
shown the photos and states (p. 50), "That looks like more than
one target to me in the various pictures."

Of such fluff are debunker urban legends born. Never mind that
it is merely an opinion, an eyeball estimate. Moore says it, so
it must be true, an "unquestionable", absolute, uncontestable
fact.

Now let me again break the bad news to the debunkers, based not
on an eyeball estimate, but on a very careful, 3-D computer
analysis of the photos I have been doing the last two weeks.
There are no extra targets. Nada. Zippo. Every radar target
scrap in those photos is accounted for by exactly one target.
There is nary one extra stick nor one extra foil panel. I'm not
making this up. Those are simply the objective facts revealed by
a careful accounting of the actual debris in the photos.

Yet Bruce Hutchinson recites the standard Mogul Charley Moore
crash scenario. There were multiple radar targets shredded when
Mogul landed. Mack Brazel then claimed he gathered all these
shredded pieces up into one bundle, hence all those shredded
targets all mixed together.

But that isn't what the photos show. They show exactly the right
number of sticks and foil panels that would come from exactly
one target. No multiple target fragments all mooshed together
here.

Furthermore, the white paper backing on this single target is
surprising clean for a target that was supposedly dragged and
shredded through the dirt, left out in the open for a month, and
cycled through a few thunderstorms. This paper is uniform,
bright white. There is no evidence of dirt and no water stains
anywhere to be seen.

In fact, it looks exactly like a fresh radar target pulled off
the shelf from someplace, torn up by someone to make it look
like it has crashed, and then tossed on Gen. Ramey's floor for a
photo op to get the press off their backs.

 >The winds
 >were strong enough to strain the connections between an
 >entangled Rawin and the train to cause a line to let go. With
 >the ratio of lift capacity to weight now in a positive state,
 >the remaining balloons could now rise again. The train flew off,
 >leaving behind the shredded Rawin,

Yes, folks, the Mogul being blown about the wind, had the
presence of mind to leave beyond the shredded remains of exactly
one Rawin target, not one iota more nor one iota less. The other
targets on this alleged multi-target flight obligingly didn't
shred along with their singular brethren, and instead flew away
completely intact to Debunker Never-Never-Land with the rest of
the balloons.

How did the other Rawins do that -- were they covered with a
special suit of armor?

Does this strike anyone else besides me as little more than
magical thinking?

 >some fragments of burst
 >balloons, and possibly the ballast and/or transponder that
 >Cavitt reportedly recovered.

Except where are those "fragments" of burst balloon in the
photos? Would Bruce Hutchinson or any other debunker point them
out to me? What I actually see in the photos is a relatively
intact, still elastic-looking balloon. In fact, the balloon as
well as the target were _always_ described as singular by
General Ramey and minions in 1947, such as weather officer
Newton.

I have also measured the volume of these folded up balloon
material, and it works out to shoebox size. It is highly
unlikely multiple balloons would be needed to account for this
either. Again, the evidence points to a singular balloon.

As for Hutchinson and Cavitt's alleged "transponder" or
"ballast," all that was ever said about this was Marcel
mentioning Cavitt finding a "black box." The A.F. and Moore have
tried to ascribe this item to a radiosonde battery pack. Marcel,
even though he was an old and experienced radio ham, had no clue
he is dealing with a simple battery pack, which, even if
completely encased in something, should have had at least wires
or electrical contacts on the surface. The black box, of course,
was nary to be seen in the Fort Worth photos. No doubt, these
humble alleged batteries, though standard meteorological gear,
were also classified super-secret.

The radiosonde powered by the "batteries" was missing along with
the accompanying "humidity resistor" (even though all these
items were packaged together in the same polyethylene shroud --
also missing), as was the alleged sonophone payload and support
rings, and all that tough, braided lobster twine used to string
the whole mess together. All this disappeared without a trace
along with those magical Rawins that flew away without
shredding.

But according to the way the balloons trains were configured, these should
have all come down together and been found in the same general crash area
along with the one magical, clean shredded Rawin and one magical, intact,
nonshredded balloon seen in the Fort Worth photos. Furthermore, Marcel and
Cavitt supposedly scoured the area looking for other items. And Mack Brazel
certainly didn't report anything remotely resembling any of this. E.g.,
Brazel denied finding any string or wire at all.

As for the ballast gear, that shouldn't have been anywhere
close. According to the engineering schematic on Flight #2, a
cutoff switch was supposed to ditch the ballast during the
balloons' descent phase. The ballast gear should have been
smashed to pieces many miles away.

Despite this fact, the A.F. further tried to claim that the
plastic tubes holding the sand ballast accounted for Jesse
Marcel Jr.'s description of a bakelite-like material mixed into
the debris his father brought back to the Marcel house.

Which all goes to prove that if you are allowed to make any
assumptions you want and then apply some additional magical
thinking and handwaving, then you explain away anything.

 ><snip>

 >>Such a balloon could come from anywhere. Hundreds were sent up
 >>everyday from weather stations all over the country. All it
 >>would take would be for one person to turn one in amidst the
 >>national saucer hysteria, and that would account for the balloon
 >>in the photo. You don't need a Mogul recovery.

 >The majority of balloons launched in the late forties were
 >weather observation systems that were tracked optically. These
 >'piebald' balloons were pigmented for easy tracking. The
 >material used on flight four was not pigmented. But even today,
 >sightings of balloons account for significant number of UFO
 >reports.

Bruce seems to have pigmented "piebald" on the brain. What he
neglects to mention was the also very common radiosonde
balloons, consisting of the radiosonde transmitters (and
"exotic" battery backs) typically suspended from a
non-pigmented, milky white, 350 gram neoprene balloon, exactly
the same type of standard meteorological balloon that made of
most of the early Mogul trains.

How common where these? The contiguous 48 states had a net of 84
such stations in July 1947, sending up at least 2 radiosondes
every day. That's at least 168 such balloons each and every day
or nearly 1200 a week. People were picking these up all the
time, sometimes with their still, relatively intact deflated 350
gram balloon. Mack Brazel claimed to have previously found 2 of
these on his ranch, hence his disclaimer at the end of his
interview that what he found this time wasn't "in any way" like
those other two weather balloons.

As for the immediate area, the weather service in Albuquerque
sent them up every day (and the White Sands weather station sent
them up frequently as well). There were 2 others in Arizona, 6
in Texas, including El Paso, Big Springs, and San Antonio near
Fort Worth, all with military bases, and 3 in Oklahoma.

So just in the immediate area, at least 100 of these balloons
would be sent up every week. All it would take would be for one
radiosonde with deflated balloon to be turned into a local
military base near Fort Worth within just days of Roswell, and
Ramey could have had his shill, somewhat weathered, deflated
balloon then flown in for display.

 >Even Mac had recovered piebald balloons in the past.

According to Bessie Brazel Schreiber, the weather balloons they
recovered on the ranch had award tags, indicating they were
probably radiosondes, not bare "piebald" balloons. If
radiosondes, then the lifting balloon, if still present would be
identical to those used on Mogul, not a pigmented "piebald"
balloon (which weren't all pigmented, BTW).

 >But these
 >past recoveries had not included foil and sticks. It was not the
 >balloon material that made the debris unusual, it was the Rawin.

Yeah, yeah. The aluminum foil, balsa wood, Scotch tape, and
white paper was just s00000 mysterious. Everybody goes gah, gah
at Roswell.

Now let's get serious. Again I toss out the following questions,
which remain unaddressed and unanswered by the debunkers. No
magical thinking allowed.

1. How did exactly one Rawin end up in Ramey's office, not one
scintilla more or less? (Remember, no magical thinking)

2. How could the white paper on the Rawin be so clean after
being dragged through the dirt to shred it and then
thunderstormed on?

3. How can one possibly account for the complete absence of even
a shard of another Rawin? How could the other Mogul Rawins
escape completely unscathed while leaving exactly one shredded
Rawin behind to be later gathered up into that one bundle by
Mack Brazel? (Remember, no magical thinking.)

4. How come there are no "fragments" of multiple popped and
shredded balloons in the Fort Worth photos? Why does the balloon
material in the photos actually look intact?

5. Why can the balloon material in the photos be accounted for
by one balloon with no need for multiple balloons to explain it?
Why did Ramey and minions, such as weather officer Newton,
always describe it as singular, as they did the radar target?
Why does Newton insist to this day that's all there was?

6. Why does the balloon still look flexible, being folded in a
pile and showing stretch marks? Supposedly it should be brittle
and breaking up into "ash-like" flakes after a month in the sun.

7. Why didn't Ramey display Cavitt's "black box" along with the
other debris, the alleged radiosonde "battery box." Nothing
classified or mysterious about this, just standard gear on a
weather balloon.

8. What happened to all the other payload gear that should have
come down together with the Rawins on the Mogul -- items like
the radiosonde and sonobuoy supposedly on Flight 4? Not only
aren't these items in the photos, no witness in the field
described them either. Why?

9. What happened to the twine tying everything together that
should also have been found?

10. Why would the FBI be told that Wright Field disagreed with
the assessment of it being a radar target suspended from a
balloon? Why would Wright Field disagree? Why would it be
necessary to forward the target and balloon on to Wright Field
for identification yet again, after Newton's supposedly
definitive ID and Ramey's announcement that the special flight
to Wright Field was no longer necessary.

11. Can even one item or physical characteristic of the debris
shown in Fort Worth clearly indicate it must have come from
Mogul instead of being a standard Rawin and meteorological
balloon from somewhere else/

To try to answer all these questions with a Mogul crash is
literally impossible without the use of magical thinking. You
may as well try to pass a camel through the eye of a needle.

Now here's a very simple theory that explains all these details
without magical thinking and in a very straightforward way. That
alone is a good indication that it is a sound theory.

There is exactly one, clean radar target without twine attached,
because that's what they started with. No need to hypothesize
other magical Rawins that flew away unscathed or don't get dirty
in the dirt and rain or had their twine vanish. They pulled a
fresh target off the shelf from somewhere, tore it up, threw the
pieces on the ground, and declared that is what was found at
Roswell.

There is only one, relatively new, relatively intact, elastic,
and nonshredded balloon, because that's also what they started
with. Among over a thousand sent up every week throughout the
U.S., including a hundred from the immediate geographical area,
they located one turned in by some patriotic American to a
nearby military base. Being the Air Force, both singular target
and balloon could be flown in from nearby in short order.

Wright Field disagreed that it was a radar target and balloon,
because something completely different was described to them,
hence the need for the special flight to continue. Whatever it
was, it certainly wasn't what was shown in the photos. The
balloon and radar target got tossed in the garbage after it had
served its purpose, as Ramey's FBI & press contact person, intel
officer Major Kirton, said they would do.

That explains everything without resorting to incredibly
strained logic or magical thinking. They brought in a shill
balloon and radar target for a photo op to get the press off
their backs, hence the singular balloon and radar target. There
is nothing to tie this debris to Mogul, because that is not what
was recovered in the field and then flown to Fort Worth. The
real Roswell debris, something else entirely, got flown on to
Wright Field. Thus no need to re-identify an obvious balloon and
radar target.

Curiously that is also exactly what witnesses Marcel and Dubose
said happened. Imagine that.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                      Alfred's Odd Ode #355 - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 06:08:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:47:41 -0500
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #355 - Lehmberg


Apology to MW #355 (For January 23, 2002)

I must defend the beating heart of what one thinks is true, but
do it in a way that makes a place for me with you. So, poetry's
a song one sings to tell a truth some way. Rhymed lying is
impossible, or harder, safe to say... who makes up lying poetry?
What audaciousness is that? Few'd take the time to craft a work
of crap for toes to tap! Who'd suffer time to make up rhyme that
could, to MOCK, be sung, and know if caught, it is the rope
they'd use to see him hung...

This song is sung in words of rhyme to make a different sense;
it's called a pure expression, unrefined and uncondensed. It's
stuff comes out in songs that sing where some words fear to
tread. *Stuff* can be expressed where jealous mainstreams
flinch in dread! Anomaly might quicken... come to life, and use
its sting! Every woman her own princess, every man his honored
king? ...And shimmering before us is a step that we can take...
that will make us all autonomous, and what teams, then, we
_will_ make!

Everything's in levels of a quantum nature, see? Stasis is
abhorred and action wants to happen, free! As it happens,
*things* will happen if they're happening or not! If *things*
happen then they're natural; if they don't...? That's _all_
you've got. So, one must look within ones self to better look
"without". There is finding in the looking, and that's all I am
about. There is all that one could need that's drawn from _all_
that one could hold; the kingdom _is_ at hand, in fact, but
dealt no cards, we fold.

UFOs are present in a multitude of ways that are obvious to
anyone with a lick of sense that pays! Recorded in a history
(mostly hidden) that we know, they are written down on parchment
and composed of ink and stone! They're in portraits and in
pictures, and they move on secret films! They're seen by famous
witnesses and some witnesses are killed? Dismissing those
reports that are as bogus as can be, still leaves, then, many
thousands that are righteous, most agree!

...And _that_ destroys, invalidates, and up-ends institutions:
our Religious and Political -- Corporate Media mass
confusions... All are made well suspect with the way they play
their game, with their lying obfuscation, and the way they shift
their blame. We're _manipulated_ in a way that suits too few,
so that status-quos from yesterday can suck their life from you.
If everything one knows is wrong, then what is one to do? Start
living more responsibly. You play? Who pays? Be true.

There's more to life than they'd let on, and who the hell were
they? They're the privileged arbitrary non-elected holding sway!
They are those, that having had, would keep on _having_, friend
-- practicing injustice's specious ethics, they'd pretend. They
have the information that would credit any ONE, explaining why
it's hidden and obscured or dissed and shunned. They manipulate
the mainstream and they nurture the mundane; they hide their
dark agendas, secret plans, and ill-got gains. They covet the
duplicitous, and they profit out of hand from the masses thought
beneath them -- these mislead (?), don't understand...

I sing these songs to clear my head and dissipate the fog. The
relief, perhaps illusion (?), makes for better dialogue. I get
communication from more folks that would be free, from that
aggregate insulted who aspire off their knees, from folks who
feel within their souls, "there must be more to life..." than is
dreamt of in *philosophies* that contribute to our, senseless,
strife...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

They really are songs. Scat songs. John, Mr. Flynn, and Jim
have heard them sung, forgetting that they'd all agree a better
voice needs sing them, I'm sure... (though there was that _one_
reported "swoon" <g>). But, songs they are. And songs, most
times, tell a kind of truth, don't they? I may _be_ mistaken,
but I'm not lying. How does one lie in song?

~~=D6~~
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-feebroids.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                    Movie Review - The Mothman Prophecies

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:15:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:15:14 -0500
Subject: Movie Review -  The Mothman Prophecies


Source: The Toronto Star

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=3D73ed7d7=
90
80e65ec&pagename=3Dthestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=3DArticle&cid=3D1011913807=
456&ca
ll_page=3DTS_Entertainment&call_pageid=3D968867495754&call_pagepath=3DEntert=
ainmen
t/News&col=3D969483191630

Jan. 25, 2002. 01:00 AM


Truth' a major creep-out

Geoff Pevere
Movie Critic

The Mothman Prophecies
AA
Starring Richard Gere, Laura Linney,
Will Patton, Debra Messing and Alan
Bates. Directed by Mark Pellington. At
major theatres. ***

Late one night while driving on assignment, widowed Washington
Post reporter John Klein (Richard Gere) finds himself in a
stalled car near Point Pleasant, WVa. The problem is that Point
Pleasant is at least six hours away from D.C. and Klein has
arrived there in less than one. The other is that Point Pleasant
is not where he was supposed to go in the first place. He's got
no idea how he got there.

As a series of inexplicably shuddery episodes, of the kind that
give urban legends their kick and programs like The X-Files
their longevity, Mark Pellington's The Mothman Prophecies
stretches credulity even while it creeps you out. Based on John
Keel's cultish 1975 book, which recounted the author's
experience of an epidemic of weird events that allegedly
occurred in the real Point Pleasant in 1967 - including the
disastrous collapse of the Silver City suspension bridge 10 days
before Christmas - the movie departs dramatically from the book
while trumpeting its basis in "true events."

But if truth in moviemaking was ever dubious, it is surely so
here. Departures from the so-called record have been made both
in the name of streamlined mass-marketability - whatever the
real John Keel, a UPI stringer and not a Post reporter, by the
way, may have looked like, one doubts it's Richard Gere - and in
the name of actually toning some real weirdness down.

In the movie, for example, Klein - whose wife died under creepy
circumstances two years before - decides to stay in Point
Pleasant and poke around when he hears (from Laura Linney's
conspicuously attractive, conveniently single town cop) that his
unaccountable arrival there is merely one of a number of
"strange things" that have happened around town recently: people
hearing odd things on the phone, seeing winged creatures in
their yards, getting zapped in their cars by lights from the
sky.

Believe it or not, Keel's original account contained even
stranger stuff, including multiple UFO encounters, serial Men In
Black sightings and grisly livestock mutilations. All of which
qualify the flick as that rarest of Hollywood artefacts: a movie
based on a true story that has been toned down because the
truth, so to speak, was just too weird.

Besides, what remains is plenty weird and creepy enough.

Even the merest association with anything that might actually
have happened contributes to the movie's expertly sustained tone
of delicious dread. While I didn't for a minute believe what I
was watching actually happened, the simple fact that it was
based on something someone claimed actually did happen was
enough to keep me from getting too comfortable.

With his previous movie Arlington Road, former music video
director Pellington probed the paranoia bubbling just behind the
sunny fa=E7ade of all-American suburban contentment: that
underrated thriller recalled Blue Velvet inspired by JFK. Here
he extends that touch to the small town, to the middle of the
night, to winter and to the brink of apocalyptic fundamentalism.

Taking place mostly in cold, empty places after dark, the movie
has the vivid but murky quality of a nightmare that won't let
you wake up.

As Klein ventures deeper down those whispery corridors of
theory, speculation and rumour he begins to hear of the mothmen
- portent-bearing creatures of mythic dimensions, winged hell's
angels of doom who have flapped dread from above since time
immemorial.

It's like the paranoia bubbling over the surface of normality
again, except this time what's backed up is downright biblical:
America's lurking fear of Judgment. The current of
fundamentalist anxiety always courses beneath the corporate big
city veneer of business as usual.

As literal truth, The Mothman Prophecies has all the credibility
of a creepy urban legend told during a late-night drive along a
dark country road. Even though you know what you're hearing
probably never happened, and even though it winds up somewhat
preposterously, you still find yourself peering nervously into
the darkness. The truth, in such cases, is found not in details,
but in the shudders they create.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey -

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:43:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:30:08 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey -


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Congresses - Bordentown, New Jersey
 >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:46:42 -0800

[in response to the UFO Congresses announcement, G.T. commented]

 >I snipped the whole lot, not unashamedly, but with the
 >satisfaction of popping a zit, a zit on the body of ufology.
 >I know some of us may share some sympathies with the views to
 >be expressed but here is my opinion: In the expressed
 >interest in accuracy, truth, and scientific effort that needs
 >to be the formost effort in figuring out just what the heck
 >_is_ going on. Not some proclimations of peace, love and
 >space vampires.

 >Just how are we to verify some of the claims made. If these
 >folks have direct communication, ok fine let's see it. I mean
 >the Trafalmadorian Aerial Demonstration Team preforming over
 >the Bordentown Days Inn.

 >I get so tired of the New Age (it really isn't new) and I
 >know the press is going to have a field day with this. I
 >can't wait to see some media type interveiwing some fake
 >native American or fakir/guru talking about the space
 >brothers as if he or she has high tea with them at 4:00 pm
 >each day. Of course the media type will have the usual
 >X-files or some such music for the theme of the piece. Then
 >when there is say, a Bruce Maccabee or a Richard Hall or a
 >Stan Friedman in town, the media type wonders where the
 >greasepaint and rubber noses are. No such thing as a serious
 >reasearcher is there - nuyk nuyk nuyk.

Agreed (with a few very minor reservations).

Ufology will have to better define itself, and its standards of
evidence, before it can gain respect in the eyes of traditional
science. However, I suspect that isn't at the top of the
priority list for many of the speakers that were initially
listed.

But, as Jenny Randles has pointed out, these UFO Symposiums (or
Conventions or Congresses or [insert your favorite term here])
have become entertainment events that are designed to draw a
large crowd.

Bruce Maccabbee has in the past held an annual event in the
Washington DC area and he had to combined with a Fortean group
to combine their resources last year to make ends meet, and they
still have very poor attendance.

The annual MUFON Symposium is often developed to draw as many
local attendees as possible, which is one reason that the event
last year in southern California was top heavy with New Age
speakers.

Let's face it, a scientific convention at which statistics and
charts are used to show obscure anomalies, or research into
historical events that occurred more than three decades ago,
would have little interest for most people and I'm not sure you
could draw too many to attend. For attendees this is often a
form of entertainment, rather than educational.

To be fair, the speakers list that was presented indicated that
this was a prelim list and others will likely be added. In the
past there have been good speakers at this event in New Jersey,
and I trust they'll announce additions as they develop.

This genre needs to focus (IMO), and leave the entertainment
side of ufology to itself. If we are unable to focus, this
remains a form of entertainment.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                     Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Kaeser

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:56:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:35:41 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Kaeser


 >From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Whom and what determines if an abductee is 'bonafide'? I'm
 >not trying to be confrontational since I consider myself a
 >cog in that wheel.

 >All of these discussions about scientific research and
 >statistics are based on the assumption that those being
 >studied are, without a doubt, abductees.

 >How is it possible to determine this?

 >I have the utmost respect for those that have tackled this dilemma.

 >I always get a giggle when I read that "49% of abductees feel
 >such-and-such" - many of the abductees I know do not talk to
 >_anyone_ (researchers included). Are these considered
 >'self-proclaimed' abductees? Perhaps...

 >Does having a researcher investigate your case and declare
 >you "real" make it so? I'd be interested in hearing what
 >others think...

Let me ask the reverse. How can you show that the claims of
these 'abductees' are not true? In other words, if we are to
believe the statements of the 'abductees' then we have to take
them at face value and develop theories accordingly. If we don't
believe their statements, then we should look for an alternative
cause and try to convince them of their error. Could you make
that judgment call?

This, I believe, one of the problems that researchers face in
this. Physical evidence of abductions is very rare, as are
multiple witness abductions, so we are (for the most part) left
to base this facet of the genre on anecdotal testimony.

But in answer to your direct question, I know of no litmus test
that researchers have developed to establish an 'abductee's'
validity as an abductee. I believe that most 'abductees' are
referred to researchers, so there's a presumption that some sort
of event has occurred. John Mack's group was infiltrated by a
reporter in this way, which resulted in a highly critical
article, so many are more careful today.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                       Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:45:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:57:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Lehmberg


 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:51:40 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:36:04 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Dennis,

 >>May I make an observation here. What I see in the photos appears
 >>to be balloon/target debris. In your post you suggest that it is
 >>"the original Roswell stuff." How do you, or I know for a fact
 >>that the material laying in Ramey's office was in fact the
 >>original stuff that came from Roswell. In fact this stuff
 >>(balloon/target material) could have come from most anywhere from
 >>base supply.

 >>The facts would seem to indicate that at that date and time, in
 >>Rameys office a ballon/target was troted out for what we would
 >>call today "a photo op" that was designed to get the press off
 >>of everybodys back.

 >The trouble with trying to think and talk about Roswell is that
 >almost every researcher has a different Roswell in mind. When
 >Researcher A talks about Roswell, he or she might have in mind a
 >Roswell that involved multiple objects and crash sites, alien
 >bodies, a massive recovery and cover-up, and who knows what
 >else. Researcher B's Roswell might be a minimalist one, with the
 >Foster ranch debris field, no fire engines nor bodies, but one
 >with a press conference in Fort Worth at which a weather balloon
 >was substituted for the real debris. And so on.

Still, a proliferation of a brouhaha did occur. Still, the
existence of this plethora of conflicting testimonies is right
out of a covert manual on civil disturbance. Still, the
occurrence has the interest of the armed forces and a list of
institutional acronyms too numerous to mention. Still the
history has had too much of its vital evidence inexplicably
erased, or misplaced over the years... Still the whole affair is
imbued with too much fulsome fishiness to suit only one with
eyes to see and ears to hear... not to put to fine a point on
it. The profusion of stories is a symptom of a disease, and not
the disease itself.

 >If the real Roswell would simply stand up and step forward, life
 >would be much easier. But it's obvious at this point that that
 >ain't gonna happen - at least to everyone's satisfaction.

And whose fault is that? You seem to lay the blame at the feet
of this conflicted cornucopia of researchers, only, and give no
credit to a jealous mainstream that marginalizes the efforts of
the best of that breed and ballyhoos the very worst. Who gets
the greater mainstream push? Posner or Marrs? Oberg or Hall?
Shermer or Rudiak?

 >It has to be said (and I realize this isn't a popular position)
 >that part of the blame for the confusing picture we have needs
 >to be laid at the feet of the original writers on the subject.
 >All sorts of spurious testimony crept into the arena that never
 >should have been allowed in in the first place.

Well - I reject this out of hand. It is the efforts of these
men and women, only, that have remotely gotten any air to this
thing at all. That mistakes may have been made does not detract
in any way from the core of this inexplicable tale, which, even
untrue, does nothing to detract from an _otherwise_obvious_!

 >In their defense, though, this is the way research proceeds: two
 >steps forward and one step back. But it's a little bit like the
 >correction of the front page headline that gets buried on page
 >16 of the next day's paper: too little, too late.

Actually - it is exactly that. All agree that each are front
page news. Expand the metaphor and consider the page-16 story
that should be five inch banner headlines on the front page...
but then you're not going to get a lot from a pack of media
corporate lap dogs, are you.

 >The end result
 >is that there are a lot more Roswells running around out there
 >than there should have been.

And I ask again? Whose fault is that? I've got to lay it at the
feet of the suspicious, suspect, and specious mainstream.

 >One thing I have never "liked" about even the bare bones Roswell
 >is the paucity of variety in the debris described. At the most
 >we're talking about four or five types - beams, foil, maybe some
 >threads and some Bakelite-like stuff. This does not like a
 >spaceship sound.

I don't believe that any of us have a clue what the recovered
material was beyond the testimony that the material covered a
big area, gouged the ground (?), surprised at least two
exceptionally competent witnesses, and was held in the hands of
a sober, professional, and highly educated man alive today.

 >Admittedly, a comparison to known terrestrial technology might
 >not be the soundest approach, but it's the only one we have.
 >Imagine, if you can, a B-1 or B-2 bomber coming apart overhead.
 >You would literally find hundreds, if not thousands, of
 >different types of debris, not to mention body parts.

As admitted later, you make a big assumption regarding what you
think a spaceship should be, and forget that your ho-hum reality
appears to be a magic kingdom utopia to an average man of just a
hundred years ago... and a few living today.

 >Maybe at some point in the distant future flying machines get
 >vastly simpler, rather than more complex, from what we have
 >today -- I just can't bring myself to imagine how.

I suspect that shortly you're going to have to bring yourself to
imagine a lot more that that. Hell - just the last decade is
testiment.

 >Nor can I
 >wrap my mind around the presumed assumption that material
 >capable of surviving space travel would somehow come apart so
 >completely as is usually described by Roswell witnesses,
 >typically without mention of scorch or fire marks.

Who says it has to survive space travel? I can shield myself
from a billion volts with a tin-foil cape (matching cap
optional), maybe that's all that's required.

 >Depending, of
 >course, on which particular Roswell you're referring to.

That would be the one that most sticks in the craw.

 >This is why I personally have no problem applying Occam's Razor
 >and subscribing to the most minimal Roswell of them all -
 >Project Mogul. Whether one agrees or not, Mogul was in the area,
 >could have come down on the Foster ranch, could have been what
 >was recovered, shipped to Fort Worth, and photographed on
 >Ramey's floor. It's simple, neat, and straightforward, with no
 >need of cover ups, switching of material, and vast conspiracies.

Still, better men than us have pointed out the evidence of a
very real conspiracy regardless, and given just a
straightforward weighing of conflicting citations from their
detractors (?) the conspiracy therorists are, by far and away,
more convincing than their opposition. The conspiracy is real
enough for simple psychological reasons. Pretending it's not
there just increases the likelyhood of it.

 >How can I explain all the anecdotal testimony that argues
 >otherwise? That's easy, too. I can't. But I can't explain why
 >Glenn Dennis is still sticking to his nurse story, either - nor,
 >indeed, why he came up with it in the first place.

...and that's a tempest in a teapot anyway, and not near as
interesting as the aspects of Roswells historical slate wiped
inexplicably clean...

 >Finally, there's the 'what if' test. What if we had really
 >recovered the remains of an extraterrestrial spaceship near
 >Roswell in 1947? Would history have played out the way it has? I
 >think the argument can be made that it wouldn't have - that
 >there would be visible footprints in both government and
 >military policy at large that I just don't see any convincing
 >evidence of.

Forgetting for a moment that an assumption of science fiction is
required to agree with you, this point _is_ hard to contest.
Still, there is the technological spike that occured right after
1947, and it is not the visible footprints that should concern
us as much as the worrisome invisible ones.

 >By way of but one large example, I don't think the Cold War
 >would have unfolded as it did had we actually had knowledge of a
 >spaceship from another planet as early as 1947. But that's
 >another e-mail.

And a comfortable way to feel, assuredly, but given all the other
historical, photographic, and quality anecdotal evidence, is it valid?
There's plenty going on even if Roswell is complete claptrap, which, as
shown by the amount of impassioned discussion it busily generates,
demonstrates that it is assuredly not.


 >In the meantime, that's my Roswell, and I'm sticking to it.

Regardless? <g>.


 >Everyone else is welcome to theirs. Bodies and all.

Some "body" knows. <g>.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
  ~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:25:16 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 11:35:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:35:10 CST
 >Subject: Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:08:26 -0600
 >>UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology
 >>>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:34:05 +0000

 >>>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:57:36 CST
 >>>>Subject: Quote From John Keel About 'Current Ufology'


Hi, Chris,

 >>>>Further to various discussions about Keel and Coleman and Barker
 >>>>in the context of the new Mothman movie, I found the following
 >>>>statement by Keel quoted by Barker in The Silver Bridge (the
 >>>>original book about Mothman, published in 1970). The interview
 >>>>took place in 1966.

 >>>>"I suspect that the UFO buffs and many of the serious
 >>>>researchers like yourself have allowed themselves to be misled
 >>>>and diverted by the controversies and nonsense surrounding this
 >>>>subject.

 >(But I believe we would have to concede this point.)

I think John Keel has contributed his share of controversy and
nonsense to this subject, probably more so than many. This is
really a case of the pot's calling the kettle black.

 >>As someone intimately familiar, from long experience and exposure,
 >>with Keel's writings, methods, and personality, I agree completely with
 >>Dick. To be blunt about it, I'm shocked that Chris, for whom I have
 >>the greatest respect, represents John Keel as a rational critic of
 >>ufology.

 >That's funny, I don't recall describing Keel as such. I thought
 >my post was quite clear. I simply found the quote within The
 >Silver Bridge, a volume much in demand today with the release of
 >the Mothman movie, and asked the question of its relevance to
 >ufology today, whether it was either more or less significant.

I was, and remain, surprised that you chose to quote Keel to
make a point, implicitly elevating him to the rank of rational
critic. In fact, Keel comes with an enormous amount of
intellectual and other baggage, and his own role in UFO history
is, at best, an intensely controversial one. If you sought to
make a point about ufology's failings, in my opinion you should
used your own words - which would, given your well-earned
reputation for sober intelligence and general thoughtfulness, be
taken seriously by nearly everybody. Either that, or you could
have cited someone whose authority to address the issue is less
open to dispute than Keel's.

 >My other point was actually to show that The Silver Bridge is
 >the book more closely aligned with the movie's sensational
 >approach, rather than Keel's later work.

It should be noted that The Silver Bridge is essentially a
novel. The Mothman Prophecies - not to mention Keel's work
generally - is fairly sensational in itself. Not necessarily
Keel's fault, of course; this stuff is sensational by its very
nature.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                     Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:44:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:22:10 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Sandow


 >From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Whom and what determines if an abductee is 'bonafide'? I'm not
 >trying to be confrontational since I consider myself a cog in
 >that wheel.

 >All of these discussions about scientific research and
 >statistics are based on the assumption that those being studied
 >are, without a doubt, abductees.

 >How is it possible to determine this?

Michelle is right -- this is a real problem in research. We have
many people who say they're abductees. Some of them work with
researchers, who of course differ greatly among themselves, and
make differing judgements about who's likely to be an abductee.

Various studies have been made (usually with pyschological
tests) of people who say they're abductees. But nobody, to my
knowledge, has studied (a) if there's any measurable difference
(in demographics, for example, or test results) between people
who say they're abductees and people who don't say that. or  (b)
between people who say they're abductees and work with
researchers, and people who say they're abductees but don't do
that. For that matter, there might be differences among people
who say they're abductees and work with various researchers, but
that, too, hasn't been studied (though it's widely assumed, for
instance, that abductees who work with John Mack have a positive
view of their abductions, while people who work with Budd
Hopkins don't).


Very frustrating!

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                      'Mothman' Sightings Will Continue

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:38:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:58:07 -0500
Subject: 'Mothman' Sightings Will Continue


Source: USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/life/enter/movies/2002/2002-01-23-mothman.htm


USA Today
Wednesday
23 January 2002
Page 4D

'Mothman' sightings will continue

By Stephen Schaefer, USA TODAY

Until now, the Mothman has been known only to a devoted,
cultlike few. That's certain to change with The Mothman
Prophecies, out Friday and starring Richard Gere. The
otherworldly 7-foot, red-eyed, winged apparition known as
Mothman might even become a pop-culture totem, like Big Foot.

John A. Keel's The Mothman Prophecies is based on paranormal
events the author experienced and studied in Point Pleasant,
W.Va., in 1966-67, while writing about UFOs for Playboy. It's
not giving away too much to say the residents were hearing and
seeing things, culminating in a bridge collapse that cost 46
lives.

Because the thriller is advertised as "based on true events,"
Keel, Mothman director Mark Pellington and Mothman expert Loren
Coleman (featured at 10 ET/PT Wednesday night on the FX channel
documentary Searching for the Mothman) reveal the "truths"
behind the film.

"Maybe we should have said 'inspired by true events'", a
cheerful Pellington says.

Says Coleman, who has published a book
[Mothman and Other Curious Encounters, NY: Paraview, 2002]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1931044341/

on the "dark and sinister" subject: "Pellington's made it a
psychological thriller and not a monster movie. With this movie,
Point Pleasant will become like Roswell and explode with
tourism."

In the film, Washington Post reporter John Klein, played by
Gere, investigates the strange goings-on.

"That's fiction," Pellington says.

But a few truths are out there:

*    Frightened teens. "That came right out of the book,"
Pellington says. "Keel describes two kids who had sex who felt
this thing attack them."

Says Coleman, who interviewed one of them: "A huge creature
about 7 feet tall with huge wings and red eyes shuffled toward
them, they ran to the car, and at 100 mph drove back to Point
Pleasant. They could see the creature flapping right behind
them."

*    Sad sack. Will Patton (TV's The Agency) plays a man going
nuts from his encounters with the Mothman, who takes the form of
Gere's Klein. "He's invented, a composite of two of the major
witnesses who had intense Mothman manifestations," Pellington
says. "Like Alan Bates says to Klein in the film, 'It's
perception, John. They appear differently to everybody. A man, a
voice, a light, a monster.' That I wrote."

*    The scientist. Bates (Gosford Park) plays Alexander Leek,
driven mad by his Mothman encounter. Leek is fictional, but the
name is a clue: It's Keel spelled backward.

Says Keel, 72: "The book tells what happened to me. Alan Bates
gives a Keel speech, almost word for word, of what I've been
saying for years."

*    The tragedy. As for the Silver Bridge collapse, "that
happened in 1967," Pellington says. "It was explained as metal
fatigue. Once the bridge came down, the phone calls and
sightings stopped. That's why it became legendary and why people
blamed a force."

Coleman says that is fiction. "Sightings continue."

The real Keel, unlike Gere's Klein, was nowhere near the bridge
that day. "I knew the exact time it was going to happen, but you
couldn't warn anyone because it might cause a panic, and it
might not be true."

He knew because "I was getting these damned mysterious phone
calls, just like in the movie."

The film has 36 people dying, not 46, but the studio didn't
"want to kill too many," Pellington says. "My father's football
number was 36, and 40 was too many."

--
Photo:
Melissa Moseley, AP

Dan Callahan, left, and Richard Gere in The Mothman Prophecies,
opening in theaters Friday.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                 West Virginia Town Buzzing About 'Mothman'

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:42:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:02:12 -0500
Subject: West Virginia Town Buzzing About 'Mothman'


Wireless Flash Weird News : January 22, 2002


West Virginia Town Buzzing About 'Mothman'

POINT PLEASANT, W.V. (Wireless Flash) -- Local merchants in the
town of Point Pleasant, West Virginia, are seeing a rise in
tourism thanks to the new Richard Gere movie "The Mothman
Prophecies" -- opening Friday (Jan. 25).

The town is home to the legendary Mothman, and Ruth Finley,
owner of the Lowe Hotel, says a lot more tourists are visiting
specifically to search for the strange creature that's haunted
the town for centuries.

She says town leaders are selling Mothman beanie babies, and
there are plans to erect a Mothman museum and fudge shops.

But not everyone is thrilled about the Mothman tourist frenzy,
according to Loren Coleman, who documented Mothman sightings for
his book "Mothman and Other Curious Encounters" (Paraview
Press).

Coleman claims many Mothman eyewitnesses who spoke out about the
creature in the past are now so afraid of being further
ridiculed that they have either moved or shut off phone service.

http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/newscenter/weirdnews.html?qdate02-01-22&nav=
VIEW&id=B09952ZX41L020122








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                            Wolf Files On Mothman

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:42:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:06:34 -0500
Subject: Wolf Files On Mothman

Source: ABC News

http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/us/wolffiles/wolffiles.html

The Selling of Mothman
A Small Town Hopes to Make Big
Bucks Off a Winged Monster

By Buck Wolf


Jan. 22 -- Move over, Bigfoot. See ya, Sasquatch. America's new
No. 1 monster this year is destined to be Mothman.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
'He's Our Monster'  Batman Inspires Mothman

The flying, blood-eyed, 7-foot-tall monster that once terrorized
Point Pleasant, W.Va., chasing cars and mutilating animals, is
making a comeback. He's out to fill Bigfoot's big shoes  -
especially at the cash register.

The Mothman Prophecies, starring Richard Gere, opens in theaters
Jan. 25, and that might be the best thing in the paranormal
tourism business since the Loch Ness Monster backstroked to
Scotland.

Get ready for Mothman Beanie Babies, T-shirts and Christmas
ornaments. One West Virginia man has already sold Sony Pictures
on a Mothman Internet game.

'He's Our Monster'

"He's our monster, so we want to make money off him," says Hilda
Austin, executive director of the Point Pleasant Chamber of
Commerce. "We don't want anyone stealing our thunder."

People used to run from ghosts. But these days, people run to
ghosts. Monsters are good for business, and if your hotel is
haunted, all the better.

Only a few years ago, The Blair Witch Project had folks flocking
to Burkittsville, Md., where the hit horror film is set. Local
officials complained that thrill-seekers were snatching up road
signs and vandalizing tombstones.

The obsession reached such heights that the mayor offered this
exasperated message on her voice mail: "This is the town office,
Burkittsville, Maryland. If this is in regards to The Blair
Witch Project, it is fiction."

But Burkittsville, a tiny hamlet of 200 people, wised up to the
fast-buck mentality. Previously unemployed locals quickly found
a place in a burgeoning tourist business, selling "witch-chaser"
bags filled with smooth stones, garlic cloves and lavender
sprigs.

Now, Point Pleasant, an Appalachian town of 6,000 near the Ohio
border, is looking for an unlikely hero in the form of a huge,
hideous moth. That's pretty amazing, considering the legend.

Between 1966 and 1967, dozens of people came forward to claim
they'd seen a giant man-bird with red, hypnotic eyes.

The first reports were from two young couples. Almost
immediately, others came forward. Authorities found it harder to
slough off each new monster sighting, and a media sensation was
born.

Batman Inspires Mothman

The Batman TV show inspired a local newspaper copy editor to dub
the creature "Mothman." Had this come a few years later, the
creature may have been called "Big Bird", although a flying
Bigfoot spotted on Washington state's Mount Rainier has been
dubbed "Batsquatch" (not Batboy).

Writer John A. Keel later speculated that the sightings might
even point to an alien visitation. His book, upon which the
movie is based, documents a rash of UFO reports, alleged
poltergeist activities, Men-in-Black harassments, unexplained
animal slaughterings, and other strange activity.

"There were so many unusual occurrences in a short, 13-month
burst.", says Loren Coleman, author of Mothman and Other Curious
Encounters (Paraview Press). "What's amazing is, if you speak to
the people today, their lives have changed. Some changed jobs.
Some moved. Some got divorced."

"Whatever happened to these people, they were terrified."

The last time people saw Mothman was when Point Pleasant's
Silver Bridge collapsed on Dec. 15, 1967, killing 46 people.
Some even say the strange creature sounded a rodent-like squeal
to warn of the disaster.

Even today, Mothman isn't a joke in Point Pleasant.

But we all must come to terms with the past. And now, the
monster is fodder for local souvenirs.

"Let's face it, if we don't do it, someone else will," says
Austin. "We're the home of Mothman, and we're proud."









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                Based On True-Life Story - Is Story For Real?

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:42:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:14:39 -0500
Subject: Based On True-Life Story - Is Story For Real?

Source; The Los Angeles Times

http://www.calendarlive.com/top/1,1419,L-LATimes-Movies-X!ArticleDetail-5050=

1,00.html


LA Times
Wednesday, January 23, 2002

MOVIES

Based on a True-Life Story, but Was That Story for Real?

A West Virginia town's encounter with the unexplained inspires
'The Mothman Prophecies'.

By LORENZA MU=D1OZ, Times Staff Writer

The local headlines screamed: "Couples See Man-Sized Bird...
Creature... Something!" "Monster No Joke for Those Who Saw It,"
"Gigantic, Fuzzy Bird Chases Auto in Storm."

No, this was not a Samuel Arkoff B-horror production. This was
real - or possibly real anyway.

The time was 1966 in Point Pleasant, W.Va., and something very
strange was happening. More than 100 people reported seeing a
9-foot-tall, black, winged creature with glowing red eyes. Some
said it spoke to them and forewarned of an impending disaster in
their town, a small farming community at the intersection of the
Ohio and Kanawha rivers. One year later, their worst fears were
realized when the bridge over the Ohio River, connecting Point
Pleasant to Ohio, collapsed and 47 people died.

"Mothman" - as the beast was known by locals - was never seen or
heard from again.

"There are a lot of people who just don't want to talk about it
anymore, either because they are traumatized or they don't want
the press attention," said Jeff Wamsley, a Point Pleasant native
and author of "Mothman: The Facts Behind the Legend." "People
were pretty much scared out of their wits."

In mid-November 1966, Mothman burst into the region's
consciousness in a prominently placed story.

The story of this strange season in Point Pleasant was
chronicled by journalist John A. Keel in his 1975 book "The
Mothman Prophecies."

The book is now a movie.

"The Mothman Prophecies," a $42-million Sony Screen Gems release
that opens Friday, stars Richard Gere as a crusading Washington
Post journalist named John Klein who, through a personal
tragedy, finds himself in Point Pleasant. He gradually becomes
embroiled in the town's strange sightings until he reaches a
point of obsession and near lunacy. Although the real story
occurred in the 1960s, the movie is set in contemporary times.
The film also stars Laura Linney (who was paired with Gere in
the 1996 thriller "Primal Fear") and "Will & Grace's" Debra
Messing.

Screenwriter Richard Hatem ("Under Siege 2: Dark Territory") had
been fascinated by science fiction and the paranormal since
childhood. But it was not until one night in the spring of 1997
that he was pulled into the Mothman world.

During a bout with insomnia, he found himself in a Pasadena
bookstore. He saw "The Mothman Prophecies" on the shelf, picked
it up and soon enough was sitting cross-legged on the floor
reading the book. He read through the night. By the next day, he
was on the phone with author Keel and began writing the
screenplay.

Hatem based two characters on Keel. Gere plays the younger,
cockier journalist, while Alan Bates plays an older, wiser and
spooked professor who at one time also witnessed a paranormal
event.

By 1998, Lakeshore Entertainment (producers of "The Gift,"
"Runaway Bride") bought the rights to the script and began a
two-year development process. But Hatem's vision for the film
remained intact.

"Most Hollywood movie ghosts make their presence known to help
us get back together with our girlfriends," said Hatem. "I
wanted to write a story that said you can ask questions about
why things happen, but they are the sort of things that we are
never going to get an answer to. This was a movie about dealing
with something that human beings will never be equipped to
understand."

Director Mark Pellington ("Arlington Road") was not interested
in making a "monster movie." Rather, he wanted a film about the
psychology of belief.

"Could this be a man? A voice? A light or a monster?" Pellington
said. "Many of these things we don't answer. That was the appeal
to me, the ambiguity and the unanswered questions. We wanted to
play it straight and strip out any melodrama or kookiness."

A sketch of Mothman, made by an eyewitness in rural West
Virginia. In all, more than 100 people reported seeing the
creature.

Keel, who has seen the movie, said he thought "Richard Gere does
a great job of gradually going nuts." Now 72 and still writing
books and articles from his home in New York City, he says: "I
didn't go nuts, but I was very upset. When the bridge collapsed,
it was pretty distressing.... I was determined I was going to
find the answers to this. As it progressed, I became more and
more baffled. It took a long time for me to realize that I was
dealing with something that the human mind could not understand.
There are many things that we will never know."

Indeed, nobody knows what those people saw on those dark West
Virginia nights. But for the folks who say they saw the strange,
malevolent creature - whatever it was - their lives were never
the same.

It began in mid-November 1966, when two couples, parked at an
old World War II munitions dump site that the locals called TNT,
say they were chased by a large creature. They reported the
incident to the police, and the sightings continued from there.
Some said the creature chased them to the ground. Others
suffered from bleeding eyes after reportedly seeing it. Many
never slept well again. It did not help to calm fears when the
town's investigative reporter Mary Hyre, who had devoted much
ink to the Mothman, died suddenly.

One theory is that people saw a huge sandhill crane that veered
off course. Another is that it was a giant, mutated owl. And
others say the people in Point Pleasant succumbed to mass
hysteria.

"I believe that some people saw something. It was probably a
bird," said Hilda Austin, 58, who lived through the Mothman
sightings and is currently the head of the Point Pleasant
Chamber of Commerce. "Some of it was just hoax. It could have
been something spawned by the toxic ground from the TNT area.
Some of the eyewitnesses were on drugs. I thought it was a hoot
[when this happened]; everyone just sort of laughed at this.
They just thought it was preposterous."

But others, like cryptozoologist and author Loren Coleman, said
there is a history of this kind of lore in the Ohio River
Valley. The Native American tribes of the area had a long
history of chronicling stories about Thunderbirds - large
"bird-man" figures that were always harbingers of woe.

"A lot of people want to make fun of Mothman because it's poor,
white Appalachia people [talking about it], but I try to put it
into context," said Coleman, who wrote the book "Mothman and
Other Curious Encounters." "The Iroquois and the Tuscarora and
the Wyandot tribes called them flying heads and big heads. They
were exactly like the Mothman - headless creatures with big red
eyes."

David Grabias, who was hired by the studio to make a Mothman
documentary that will air on the FX channel today, said he was
convinced the locals saw something frightful.

"When I first heard about it, I thought, 'Oh, it's West Virginia
and these are a bunch of hicks drinking too much hooch in the
mountains,'" said Grabias, who produced the Emmy-nominated
documentary "Why Dogs Smile and Chimpanzees Cry."

"But the more people we talked to, the more we felt a sense that
there was a feeling of something strange and to let sleeping
dogs lie. The people were very believable."

Pellington says that Mothman follows a pattern of the
unexplained, which makes rational, modern society ill at ease.

"I believe in things greater than us that are unexplained," he
said. "The mysteries of life are so profound; that is why this
legend and other kinds of mythology exist. I feel it keeps us
human."

Many locals were upset that the movie was not filmed in Point
Pleasant itself. It was shot in Kittanning, Penn., because it
was a large enough town to accommodate cast and crew. In
addition, Pellington needed to shut down the local bridge for
two months during filming - something the economy in Point
Pleasant could not sustain.

Instead of running from the Mothman legacy, Point Pleasant
locals are embracing it. A thriving port city at the turn of the
century, Point Pleasant has been suffering from a slow economy
for many years. Without jobs, most of the young people leave to
find a better way of life.

Mothman, they are hoping, will bring them better fortunes.

The Chamber of Commerce sold Mothman Christmas ornaments this
year. Another local created Mothman beanbag toys, which sold
like hotcakes, according to Austin.

They don't seem to fear being placed in the pantheon of strange
places like Roswell, N.M., or Loch Ness, Scotland.

"We are hoping that it will do something that will help our
economy," said Austin.

"We don't understand what the fascination is. This new
popularity of the Mothman started before the movie.... We don't
care, we just hope it will help us out."

http://www.calendarlive.com/top/1,1419,L-LATimes-Movies-X!ArticleDetail-5050=

1,00.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 25

                      Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:12:25 +0000
Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:24:56 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hall


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto"<ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:44:40 -0500

 >>From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >>Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Whom and what determines if an abductee is 'bonafide'? I'm not
 >>trying to be confrontational since I consider myself a cog in
 >>that wheel.

 >>All of these discussions about scientific research and
 >>statistics are based on the assumption that those being studied
 >>are, without a doubt, abductees.

 >>How is it possible to determine this?

 >Michelle is right -- this is a real problem in research. We have
 >many people who say they're abductees. Some of them work with
 >researchers, who of course differ greatly among themselves, and
 >make differing judgements about who's likely to be an abductee.

 >Various studies have been made (usually with pyschological
 >tests) of people who say they're abductees. But nobody, to my
 >knowledge, has studied (a) if there's any measurable difference
 >(in demographics, for example, or test results) between people
 >who say they're abductees and people who don't say that. or  (b)
 >between people who say they're abductees and work with
 >researchers, and people who say they're abductees but don't do
 >that. For that matter, there might be differences among people
 >who say they're abductees and work with various researchers, but
 >that, too, hasn't been studied (though it's widely assumed, for
 >instance, that abductees who work with John Mack have a positive
 >view of their abductions, while people who work with Budd
 >Hopkins don't).

Michelle, Greg, and List,

Speaking as a philosopher (ahem!), I think you are asking the
wrong question. No one can say who is "a bona fide abductee"
because what you apparently really mean is, "who has actually
been abducted by aliens [entities, forces]?"

As in any situation where people claim to have witnessed or
experienced extraordinary things, all one can do is to evaluate
their credibility as witnesses and their reputation as human
beings. This is, in fact, the way I have approached this issue
in my own interactions with about 150 "abductees."

So I would ask the question this way: "Who among abduction
claimants is a credible witness and reputable human being?"
Phrased that way, it is possible to make distinctions among
claimants and often to identify "wannabees," hoaxers, or
mentally disturbed persons, or at least persons who lack
credibility, and those who appear to be honestly describing
something they have experienced to the best of their ability.

  - 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                         New Hampshire Visited Again

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:02:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 03:02:13 -0500
Subject: New Hampshire Visited Again

Source: Rockingham News - Plaistow, New Hampshire

http://www.coaststar.com/news/rock/r1_25d.htm


Area UFO sightings not yet identified by officials

By Jeff Kaplan, rockinghamnews@seacoastonline.com

FREMONT -- Unidentified flying objects are not unusual in
Rockingham County. At an increasing pace over the last decade,
UFOs have been sighted performing a gymnast's repertoire of
aerial maneuvers. The Web site www.ufopage.com lists 33
documented sightings since 1995.

Last Thursday New Hampshire may have been visited again.

At 10:04 p.m. Fremont Police Officer H.D. Wood was dispatched to
Main Street to investigate a report of two objects hovering
silently in the air. The objects were described as "bright and
full of lights," according to the police report.

Wood had been on these calls before, though his department lacks
any protocol to follow and the police academy does not train
cadets for these situations.

"Quite frankly, I don't believe we have a policy as to how to
handle this kind of thing," Wood said. "I guess it's common
sense, really."

Wood said the witness was describing the actions of the UFOs as
he was en route. The witness described the objects as hovering
silently in the air. The larger of the two objects flew south
toward Sandown. The smaller object flew north toward Brentwood.
They were gone when Wood, assisted by a Brentwood police
officer, pulled up.

"We arrived on the scene and (the witness) said, 'I'm not crazy.
I'm not on drugs,'" Wood recalled.

He said the witness and the witness's wife and daughter all saw
the objects. The witness claimed a passing motorist also saw the
event but didn't stop.

Wood investigated the area, saw no evidence the snow had been
disturbed and wrote his report. Without other witnesses or any
physical indication of a visitation, Wood said he considers the
case closed.

"In my mind, if it's substantiated, you call the FAA to see if
there are any reports of aircraft in the area," Wood said. "Then
you call other dispatch centers to see if they've gotten calls,
because what happens is, if something is sighted, everyone is
going to call."

Wood said his first reaction when he received the call was to
seek background on the caller.

"To be honest, when I did get the call I did pull up my laptop
to see if we'd had any previous contact at this address," Wood
said.

He describes himself as a skeptic, but said he absolutely
believes the witness did see something.

"I was skeptical at first," he said. "Then I listened to the
person discuss the issue and they were very adamant that they
saw something."

Fremont Police Chief Neal Janvrin was an officer with the Exeter
Police Department on Sept. 3, 1965, the day of New Hampshire's
most notorious UFO sighting, an incident that became the subject
of a book, "Incident at Exeter." That day would be a significant
date in history for believers in alien visitations. It is rare
that a police officer can substantiate a sighting, but on this
day two of Janvrin's fellow officers, Dave Hunt and Gene
Bertrand, as well as many civilians, would report seeing a
large, elliptical object with red lights around it. The object
reportedly moved between houses and trees while the lights
blinked in sequence.

Janvrin said he's been on UFO calls before, but he's never seen
a UFO himself. Janvrin said the only thing an officer can do is
take a report.

"Obviously, if we get there and we see something we would try
and photograph it," he said. "If there was some sign of
disturbance we would record it."

Janvrin said he doesn't consider himself a non-believer, but
does not have enough evidence to say he is a believer.

"You look up in the sky and you see all the suns and every sun
has so many planets. I guess the possibility does exist. We're
on this planet," he said.

He added that Hunt and Bertrand's experience gives him pause to
reconsider.

"They were two guys who I worked with and I trusted," Janvrin
said.

[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                          Secrecy News -- 01/25/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:37:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:11:08 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/25/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 9
January 25, 2002


**      SECRECY IN GENETICS
**      ACKNOWLEDGING GARFINKEL
**      A BIOGRAPHY OF GENERAL GROVES


SECRECY IN GENETICS

The first systematic study of secrecy in academic science found
that geneticists often refuse to disclose the data underlying
their research or to respond to other requests for information
from fellow scientists.

"Forty-seven percent of geneticists who asked other faculty for
additional information, data, or materials regarding published
research reported that at least 1 of their requests had been
denied in the preceding 3 years," according to the new study,
published this week in the Journal of the American Medical
Association.

"Because they were denied access to data, 28% of geneticists
reported that they had been unable to confirm published
research."

The study proposed a variety of explanations for this
phenomenon.  In particular, "The commercial applications of
genetics research, along with increasing dependence on industry
funding and the rise of commercial norms in the academy, may be
partially responsible."

Explanations aside, secrecy remains a deviation from sound
scientific conduct.

"The free and open sharing of information, data, and materials
regarding published research is vital to the replication of
published results, the efficient advancement of science, and the
education of students.  Yet in daily practice, the ideal of free
sharing is often breached," the authors stated.

"Additional measures to improve openness of communication in
genetics and the sharing of published information, data and
materials seem justified," they concluded.

"Data Withholding in Academic Genetics: Evidence from a National
Survey" by Eric G. Campbell, et al, is "the first detailed,
systematic, quantitative portrait of the phenomenon of data
withholding in genetics or any other field of academic
investigation."

A summary of the new paper is available here:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v287n4/abs/joc11433.html

Befitting the subject matter, the authors promptly responded to
a request for further information.


ACKNOWLEDGING GARFINKEL

The retirement of Steven Garfinkel, director of the Information
Security Oversight Office (ISOO) for the last couple of decades,
was noted by Rep. Constance Morella in a statement in the
Congressional Record yesterday.

Public servants come and go, and unless they really screw up,
most people outside of their immediate working environment will
never know their name.

But Garfinkel's positive impact on government secrecy policy has
been so far out of proportion to the relative obscurity of his
position that some greater recognition is demanded.

"His expertise has allowed him to create a system that has
produced the largest number of declassified pages in the history
of the Government's program--more than 800 million," said Rep.
Morella.  "This system will provide researchers and historians
with new information that will help write our Nation's history
for years to come."  See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2002/garf.html

Garfinkel's ISOO colleagues and friends have organized a
celebration in his honor in Washington on January 30.


A BIOGRAPHY OF GENERAL GROVES

A new biography of General Leslie R. Groves, who led the
Manhattan Project in the development of the atomic bomb, argues
among other things that Groves was instrumental in the creation
of what would come to be called the "national security state,"
with its strict controls on official information.

"Racing for the Bomb" by nuclear historian Robert S. Norris will
be published shortly by Steerforth Press and is available for
purchase now. For more information see:

http://www.steerforth.com/books/racing_for_the_bomb.htm


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message:

subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                    Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:26:41 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:19:12 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg


 >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:12:25 +0000

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto"<ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:44:40 -0500

 >>>From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >>>Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Michelle, Greg, and List,

 >Speaking as a philosopher (ahem!), I think you are asking the
 >wrong question. No one can say who is "a bona fide abductee"
 >because what you apparently really mean is, "who has actually
 >been abducted by aliens [entities, forces]?"

 >As in any situation where people claim to have witnessed or
 >experienced extraordinary things, all one can do is to evaluate
 >their credibility as witnesses and their reputation as human
 >beings. This is, in fact, the way I have approached this issue
 >in my own interactions with about 150 "abductees."

 >So I would ask the question this way: "Who among abduction
 >claimants is a credible witness and reputable human being?"
 >Phrased that way, it is possible to make distinctions among
 >claimants and often to identify "wannabees," hoaxers, or
 >mentally disturbed persons, or at least persons who lack
 >credibility, and those who appear to be honestly describing
 >something they have experienced to the best of their ability.


Hynek likened it to a spectrograph on page 21 of his 'The UFO
Experience'. One would not use a spectrograph that has not been
validated to observe a distant galaxy and then trust the results
of that observation. The unvalidated spectrometer might just be
capable of creating entertaining but inaccurate smears of
separated light... but a validated instrument would be trusted
without question because its calibration has been assured. Do we
have instruments to trust? I think we must. Way out on the
periphery of this thing, I feel I know three.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                        Meier-Case Photos On Website

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:09:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:27:18 -0500
Subject: Meier-Case Photos On Website


Hello List,

I've posted on my website some of the Meier-case film-frames and
still photos whose analyses don't require the original film or
color slides to arrive at definitive conclusions.

For example, I've posted the film/video frame at the time of the
UFO's jump from one position to another, and adjacent frames
also, in:

http://www.tjresearch.info/bachtel.htm

Some of you may never have seen the one frame that shows the
craft in two positions at once. I've examined the clouds in the
background during this sequence in order to estimate how long a
time period (circa 15 secs) hoaxers would have had in which to
reposition a couple UFO models (and subsequently cut and splice
film), before the cloud pattern would have changed
significantly. In the same file I show one of the frames in
which the craft is partially eclipsed behind the brow of the
hill.

I've also looked into the better known still-picture series in
which 3 photos show a craft in front of the sun and in line with
the edge of a tree, and point out the nefarious means by which
Kal Korff tried to debunk them. That's in:

http://www.tjresearch.info/hasenbol.htm

There I also show, and discuss, some of the other pictures in
that 34-slide series that you may not have seen.

And then I've gone into greater depth on the photo series in
which a craft posed for Meier on all sides of a fir tree that's
at a considerable distance from the camera. Some of us discussed
this particular case on the list a year or two ago, but in the
website file I pictorially as well as textually indicate the
obvious differences between a mature fir tree and a potted tree
or model tree. That's in:

http://www.tjresearch.info/moretree.htm

There I also point out where Korff's assumptions were off base.

In addition, I've added a file on "plausible deniability," which
looks into the implications of how the UFO phenomenon could have
gone on some 55 years, with hundreds of thousands of valid
sightings, without the aliens ever staying around long enough
for many news media to converge on the scene and show the world,
etc., or without ever having left enough unconfiscated evidence
behind that would convince scientists of its reality. And there
I've discussed why and how Meier's aliens would have needed to
similarly provide "plausible deniability" so that skeptics would
be able to latch onto it if they needed to. That's in:

http://www.tjresearch.info/denial.htm

There topics are introduced in the file:

http://www.tjresearch.info/ufology.htm .

I welcome critical or substantive comments, but may not reply to
the other kind.


Regards,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                 John Alexander's Review Mothman Prophecies

From: Colm Kelleher <nids@anv.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:48:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:29:32 -0500
Subject: John Alexander's Review Mothman Prophecies


Some readers may be interested in the review by John Alexander
of the Mothman Prophecies movie. It has just been posted to the
NIDS web site and may have some relevance to some recent
posts on UFO UpDates.


http://www.nidsci.org/articles/alexander/mothman.html


Sincerely

Colm Kelleher
NIDS
http://www.nidsci.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:44:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:31:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:25:16 -0600

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:35:10 CST
 >>Subject: Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology

<snip>

 >I think John Keel has contributed his share of controversy and
 >nonsense to this subject, probably more so than many. This is
 >really a case of the pot's calling the kettle black.

<snip>

Jerry, Chris, et al

I think someone should post the first sentence or two or graf of
The Mothman Prophecies here. I'd do it myself, but my copy is
presently in storage and/or passage.

But talk about your purple UFO prose!

It doesn't get any better.

I just hope Hollywood paid Keel for his time.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                      Mothman & Looney Tunes 'Gossamer'

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:29:33 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:38:59 -0500
Subject: Mothman & Looney Tunes 'Gossamer'


Hello all,

At:

http://www.animationusa.com/wb34.html

is an example  of 50's vintage Bugs Bunny being chased by
'Gossamer', an alien-critter that was part of Marvin The
Martian's menagerie. Any resemblence to Mothman obviously is a
product of creator Chuck Jones' mind.


GT McCoy

'Acme' a name you can trust -- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                             New At 'Lost Haven'

From: Roy Hale <roy.hale@ntlworld.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:07:05 -0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:46:41 -0500
Subject: New At 'Lost Haven'


Hi All,

I have just updated my UFO section on the Lost Haven, you can
find it by clicking:

http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/Articles.shtml

I am now selling a few UFO books on the site.

I also take pleasure in informing you about a new web site
devoted to UFO sightings etc. around India. The site-owner is a
great guy, and I think he is going to be a common name among
UFO researchers around the world in the next year or so.
Prashant Solomon is his name.

I feel that Prashant has his work cut out for him, and I also
think it is an interesting and great development, for UFO
research world wide. Once again, it reinforces the fact, that
UFO sightings do not just stem from the USA & Europe!

Once you are on my UFO page Click the UFO India Banner to reach
the site.


I have two articles on the UFO India site, which are also on the
Lost Haven.


Roy Hale
Web Master of The Lost Haven
http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk
Editor of Down To Earth Magazine

Articles, Research CDs, Downloads, Business, Links, Art and
more!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 01:54:30 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:50:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 23:02:08 EST
 >Subject: Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads]
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

Hi David,

An excellent post that was well done!! I eagerly await the
response from the skeptics using non-magical thinking.....
However I suspect that they will use magical thinking and try
and sell us on the fact that it is not.

I always thought the Mogul theory was deflated to begin with!


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                         Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 02:10:57 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:52:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Stacy


 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:51:40 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:36:04 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>Dennis,

 >>May I make an observation here. What I see in the photos appears
 >>to be balloon/target debris. In your post you suggest that it is
 >>"the original Roswell stuff." How do you, or I know for a fact
 >>that the material laying in Ramey's office was in fact the
 >>original stuff that came from Roswell. In fact this stuff
 >>(ballon/target material) could have come from most anywhere from
 >>base supply.

 >>The facts would seem to indicate that at that date and time, in
 >>Rameys office a ballon/target was troted out for what we would
 >>call today "a photo op" that was designed to get the press off
 >>of everybodys back.


 >Robert,

<snip>

 >Maybe at some point in the distant future flying machines get
 >vastly simpler, rather than more complex, from what we have
 >today -- I just can't bring myself to imagine how. Nor can I
 >wrap my mind around the presumed assumption that material
 >capable of surviving space travel would somehow come apart so
 >completely as is usually described by Roswell witnesses,
 >typically without mention of scorch or fire marks. Depending, of
 >course, on which particular Roswell you're referring to.

Dennis,

Some observations

Having visited a number of plane crash sites in my life you can
find much debris that has no scorch or fire marks. On the other
hand you can find debris that is scorched and has fire marks.
Depends on the nature of the crash and so forth.

Somewhere awhile back I saw a photo of some rocket booster
debris that had come down. Some of the material didn't look
burned or scorched at all, even though it made a near reentry
type journey through the atmosphere.

 >This is why I personally have no problem applying Occam's Razor
 >and subscribing to the most minimal Roswell of them all -
 >Project Mogul. Whether one agrees or not, Mogul was in the area,
 >could have come down on the Foster ranch, could have been what
 >was recovered, shipped to Fort Worth, and photographed on
 >Ramey's floor. It's simple, neat, and straightforward, with no
 >need of cover ups, switching of material, and vast conspiracies.

The problem is the debris on the floor doesn't add up to Mogel,
nor does the theory of allegedly placing a ballon (with no
flight records or other evidence) within 17 miles of the crash
site, so it was the balloon. Mogel is lame at best.

On the other hand if somebody could place Mogel within1-4 miles
of the debris field, I am listening... listening... listening...
and likely will continue to do so because the evidence doesn't
add up.

People have made the case that the debris in Rameys office is a
balloon/target. I would have to agree. Thats what it appeared to
be in the first place. I suspect a new one, probably out of
supply, as none of the debris look like it has been dragging
through the rough country of New Mexico. I have actually found
modern Radiosonde balloon packages and can tell you that they
look far worse in outward appearances do to the exposure to the
elements, wind, rain, dirt and so on. Bottom line is the Ramey
office photos look like something was troted out for a photo op
for the press, which got the press off of the AF's back.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                   Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:29:35 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 11:33:57 -0500
Subject: Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hatch


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >Source: Rockingham News - Plaistow, New Hampshire

 >http://www.coaststar.com/news/rock/r1_25d.htm

 >Area UFO sightings not yet identified by officials

 >By Jeff Kaplan, rockinghamnews@seacoastonline.com

 >FREMONT -- Unidentified flying objects are not unusual in
 >Rockingham County. At an increasing pace over the last decade,
 >UFOs have been sighted performing a gymnast's repertoire of
 >aerial maneuvers. The Web site www.ufopage.com lists 33
 >documented sightings since 1995.

 >Last Thursday New Hampshire may have been visited again.

 >At 10:04 p.m. Fremont Police Officer H.D. Wood was dispatched to
 >Main Street to investigate a report of two objects hovering
 >silently in the air. The objects were described as "bright and
 >full of lights," according to the police report.

<snip>


Hello all:

I'm not about to count the words in this newspaper article, lets
just say its several paragraphs at least.

One simple question: For all the local color, did any of the
newsmen, witnesses, cops or whoever say a single word about the
_shapes_ of the objects?

I would ask for apparent shapes, first thing, but that's just
silly old me.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                          Filer'S Files #04 - 2002

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:57:41 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:23:36 -0500
Subject: Filer'S Files #04 - 2002



FILER'S FILES #04-2002 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
January 23, 2002, Majorstar@AOL.COM.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.filersfiles.com,


UFOs were observed over New York, Pennsylvania, Mississippi,
Louisiana, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, California, Washington,
and Austria.

NEW PLANETS NEAR VEGA

Scientists announced that the two giant clumps of dust in the
ring surrounding the star Vega may be planets. Vega is located
25 light years away in the constellation Lyra and is the
brightest star in the summer sky. The planets are apparently
trapped in this dust ring. Observations of Vega in 1983 with
the Infrared Astronomy Satellite provided the first evidence
for large dust particles around another star, probably debris
related to the formation of planets. This discovery likely
inspired Carl Sagan to place the alien listening post at Vega
in his novel "Contact." In our Solar System, dust particles
created by asteroid collisions spiral in toward the Sun. The
gravity of the planets affect the distribution of these dust
particles. The Earth, for example, traps dust in a series of
dynamical resonance's that produce a ring of enhanced density
along the Earth's orbit. When viewed from Earth, the signatures
of extrasolar planets im! printed on circumstellar dust may be
the most conspicuous evidence of their existence. Up to now
more than fifty planets have been detected by their
gravitational influence on their own stars. The dust clouds are
much easier to detect than the planets because of their much
larger surface area. It's akin to seeing the wake of a boat
from a plane when the boat itself is too small to be visible.
Because Vega is viewed nearly pole-on, it presents a perfect
target for more detailed study of planets in its dust cloud.

Editor's Note -- Almost monthly new planets are being located
by astronomers. Additionally, we now feel water is abundant in
the universe. Like Johnny Appleseed you can take some dust,
sprinkle it with water and Apple trees will grow. As I sit
here, I hold a stone meteorite in my hand that was found in
Mauritania, Africa. Its thought that many meteorites carry the
building blocks of life, and the comets carry water.
Theoretically, life should be abundant throughout the universe
with 200 billion stars in our own galaxy alone. The Bible
clearly states there are beings on other planets. "Therefore,
rejoice you heavens, and you that dwell in them." Revelation
12-12 New International

MAINE CHEVRON SHAPED OBJECT WITH BLINDING LIGHT

RICHMOND -- On January 3, 2002, the witness a construction
industry management engineering expert, observed a blinding
light very high in the horizon at 9:35 PM. He was traveling on
Interstate #95 to exit #25 in Bowdoin. The light was stationary
but too high in the sky to be a tower light. The lights did not
change in size or intensity. There were blinking red and green
lights directly on either side of the bright center light
flashing in a regular pattern and appeared to be directly
adjacent to the center light rather than offset from it. When I
exited at #25 south, I pulled off to the side of the road
behind two other vehicles that had also stopped to look; I
watched as the craft began to move diagonally northeast very
slowly. I called Peter Davenport via cell phone and the craft
changed direction and flew almost directly overhead. The object
was a wedge or a chevron with a pair of swept wings attached to
a center fuselage with sol! id webbing between the wings and
the fuselage. The length of the appendages of were equilateral
with a slight curvature of the webbing at the trailing edge.
All of the underside surfaces were equally well lit with a
diffused light. The surfaces were silver-gray but clarity and
light quality faded at the periphery of the object.

It was as though someone shined a spotlight directly upward at
the underbody and only illuminated the center portion of the
craft. The object flew very slowly overhead and appeared to
proceed in an elliptical path north then south again. The
visible change in direction was almost immediate and didn't
appear to allow time for a west to east arc. There was no
discernible sound from the object that was moving very slowly
as it passed overhead. It was the size of a quarter when held
at arm's length. The sky was extremely clear. The object made
two circles then disappeared over the treeline. Thanks to Peter
Davenport National Reporting Center www.ufocenter .com

NEW YORK SILVER DISK

BROOKLYN -- The witness states, "I had a recent short sighting
on Saturday, January 5, 2002, at 8:40 AM. while on a bus #46.
The bus stopped at Church Avenue and I was looking west out the
window when I saw a stationary silver disk in the sky
reflecting the morning sun. It didn't move or wobble at any
time but just hovered. It had to be above 10,000 feet because
there were passenger jets above it to the southwest and
northwest. I was watching it for about 15 seconds without
looking away and it disappeared. It looked about the size of an
air rifle pellet. I have been doing a lot of thinking since I
finished reading a Wendelle C. Stevens book. People have been
having contact with ET's for a long time and yet the
information like those in his books go unreported or unknown to
the majority of people. I know very well that
abductions/contacts continue happening, but I think that the
world should know of these older reports from the 50's t!
hrough 70's as a way of promoting interest and investigation in
other countries. Why aren't the major organizations enlisting
investigators around the world to reinvestigate those older
contacts along with the newer contacts? I had never reported my
sightings until I did with you and I am glad that I did because
I can read your Filer's Files and know that others are having
sightings and reporting them. Thanks and God Bless.
grodriguez@windelsmarx.com

Editor's Note: There are a few researchers attempting to spread
the word and gather data such as retired Lt.Col. Wendelle
Stevens. MUFON and most other UFO organizations do not have the
funds to support any research. Virtually all investigation is
paid for individually by the investigators themselves.
Therefore, there is very limited capability. Your corner Pizza
Restaurant spends more, so consequently there is little real
scientific research that can be done except by volunteers. Real
research is very expensive. Those who make large amounts of
money in the Entertainment Industry or Business do not appear
interested in supporting UFO research. I'm hoping that this
will change.

NEW JERSEY UFO SIGHTING

RUTHERFORD -- On January 9, 2002, I was driving on Route 3 west
out of Lyndhurst when I saw a bright light to the right of me
at 12:15 AM. I thought it was a plane descending ,but as it got
closer I realized that it wasn't in the shape of a plane and it
was circular. It had two bright lights in the front like head
lights and around it were little white lights with a few green
and red. It was descending fast, circling down to the ground
and then it disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director of
the UFO Reporting Center www.ufocenter.com

MISSISSIPPI FLYING TRIANGLE

PONTOTOC -- On January 8, 2002, the witness saw a wedge shaped
craft at about 6:40 PM, that was heading southeast at about
2000 feet. It had one continuous light which lit up the whole
outer edge of the craft. The sighting lasted about 30 seconds.
The craft made no noise. I noticed another wedge shaped object
just hovering for almost an hour. It is now 7:30 and it is
still there. A large, low-flying rectangular object was sighted
on November 19, 2001, at 9:45 PM by the same witness. Three
wedged shaped craft had red green, white, and yellow lights.
The craft made no sound and flew at 2000 feet. They were
traveling west at a very high rate of speed in a triangle
formation. Thanks to NUFORC

LOUISIANA SIGHTING: STRETCHES FROM LOUISIANA TO MISSISSIPPI

HONEY ISLAND SWAMP -- On January 13, 2002, Joe and Linda
Montaldoy were driving in the swamp that includes Stennis NASA
Test Site near Pearl River. They entered near sunset and drove
in eleven miles and noticed the last of the hunters drive out
about 5:45 PM, so they decided to leave. They wrote, "As we got
close to the gate a very bright, circular, strobing light
appeared behind the trees to our left in the south." As it came
over the tree line we got out of the car to watch it. I judged
from the height of the microwave tower I could see that it was
about 1500 feet high. It continued in our direction and passed
directly over our car. We could plainly see that it was a
triangular shaped black object with an amber colored globe in
the center, a red light at its front point and a white light at
each of its back points. It was about the size of a commercial
jet. We only viewed it for a few minutes because the road is
narrow and tr! ees line both sides. We left the swamp and were
headed back to I-59. As we approached the ramp to the
interstate we saw that it had stopped over the swamp and was
hovering in place. Because we are involved with MUFON. we
called our State Director on our cell phone. The craft now
turned back and headed southwest toward Pearl River. I could
tell by the way it was headed that it would pass directly over
a deadend road I had been on before, so I drove to the end of
this road. We got out of the car and spotted it moving very
slowly at maybe 800 feet high. We were reporting over the
phone. It stopped, turned on its axis, and headed back in our
direction and passed directly over us as we stood outside our
car. There was absolutely no sound except the barking of some
dogs in a nearby yard. We got back in the car and followed it
down the road. It was no more than 500 or 600 feet over us and
was moving very slowly. ! ; We were driving only about 20 mph
and it stayed right in front and over us. At this point it was
hard to tell it we were following it or it was staying with us
when we reached the end of the road the object headed
south-southeast. We noticed two planes cross right over it at a
much higher altitude. As we got back to the interstate the
object began to gain altitude and speed. It was headed towards
the Pirate Harbor area. We lost sight of it on the interstate,
so I decided to get off I-10 and go to Pirates Harbor Road.

We drove down this road 5 or 6 miles and came to an open area.
On one side of the road are camps and on the other side marsh.
We could see the craft over the marshes. It appeared to be
tipped over on its side. I could see no lights; I believe I was
looking at the top of it. It was like a black shape against the
stars. Before it had been traveling like a flat triangle shape
and we could see only the bottom of it. As I watched, it seem
to flip over on it's other side and I could see the bottom of
it. Sort of like a car would flip and first you would see the
hood and roof, then you would see the underside and tires. Then
it righted itself, but continued to wobble. It was headed
south-southeast toward the Ringlets Pass, which was about three
miles from where we were. The Ringlets Pass is a deep-water
channel that eventually leads into the Gulf of Mexico. We had
to speed up to keep it in sight but it was slow! ly loosing
altitude. When we got to the Ringlets Bridge we could see it
had come down into the marsh. We couldn't tell if it was in the
water or above the water. Now it was lit up with bright white
lights all along the edge of it. We came off the bridge and
pulled into the Fort Pike boat launch. We got out of our car
and called our State Director back on the cell phone.

The object was over the water about 100 to 200 yards from us.
To the right of us in the north a brilliant white light came
into view. It was just above tree level, about 300 o 400 feet
high and moving very slowly. It would move a little and then
come to a complete stop. There was a beam of light coming from
under it making a searching pattern. As we watched it started
to move toward where we were standing. The light turned off and
it passed directly over us. There was no sound. We could
clearly see that it was a triangular shape with a red light in
the front white lights on both back points and an amber light
in the middle. It was the same type of craft that was in the
water, but much smaller. As it passed over us it made a circle
toward the west and came back around. Several times it came to
a complete stop. When it was back to the spot it had started
from, it started to circle again. This time it! was lower,
maybe 200 to 250 feet, and moving more in the direction of the
downed craft. Again very slow movement and several complete
stops.

As we stood watching, we saw another craft light up from the
exact spot the first one had started. Craft #2 was moving in
the same path and at the same speed and altitude as craft #1.
As #2 passed over us we could see that it was another
triangular craft with a red light in front, two white lights in
back, an amber globe in the middle, only this craft had two
rows of white lights running down the center of it's underside.
There were six lights in each row and they were either next to
the globe or over it. A third craft now showed up in the exact
spot as the other two. It made the same slow, stopping
movements and circle as the other two. As it passed over us we
could see it was again a triangular craft with the same lights,
red in front, white in back, amber globe in the middle. The
only difference in this one was that it sent out a beam of
light from the front point for about 200 feet. The beam tilted
downward but not far enou! gh to reach the ground. Now the
three crafts were moving in an extremely slow circle in the
sky. They would stop completely and then move again. We were
still on the phone with our State Director and at this time he
told us we should get out of there.

We took a last look and to the south an object was coming our
way. We could not see the shape of this object. All we could
see was a row of very bright lights. There were six lights,
three lights a space, and then three more. They were extremely
bright and they seemed to be blinking on very, very fast. So
fast that you couldn't really tell when one went off the one
next to it came on. They were flashing and strobing so quickly,
that I couldn't really focus on them. Something caught my
attention in the corner of my eye, and I turned around and
realized that the craft in the water had changed. The white
lights around its edge were now red. Then it simply went under
the water and disappeared. At the same moment they all just
disappeared. One moment there were four crafts in the sky and
one in the water and the next there was nothing. We got in our
car and made a rather speedy departure. Almost as soon! as we
were on the road, a triangular craft, red light in front, white
lights in back, amber in the center, appeared to our left over
the trees. At the same time car lights shone right behind us on
bright beam. As the triangle flew over us the car engine
started to cough and felt like it was going out, the lights on
the car flickered on and off, the cell phone started to ring,
but it said dead cell and went blank. All this happened in an
instant. The triangle flew over us at about 100 feet heading
east to west and disappeared. The car behind us passed at a
very high speed and we saw that the plate said US Government.
We both got a headache almost immediately. The headache was
extremely painful. It felt like an immense pressure in our head
and behind our eyes. Our eyes were burning. There was also a
feeling of being ill. The incident took place between 5:45 and
8:30 PM Thanks to Joe and Linda Montaldoy

RAPIDES PARISH SHARP -- Bright lights in the night sky have
befuddled a couple who is the justice of the peace. However,
the eerie lights may have been nothing more than bombing range
flares. Raymond and Audrey Cupples were in their Sharp
community home on La. Highway 8 at about 8:00 PM. Wednesday
January 16, when Cupples noticed a "big, brilliant light"
southeast of the residence. The light appeared just above a
distant tree line, Cupples said. "I said, "It was strange. I'm
59 years old, and I've never seen anything like this." Cupples
said he stood in his front yard watching the light, a brilliant
pinkish and red color" -- for nearly two hours. It would flash
on and off at varying intervals, he said. At the same time,
higher in the sky, between six and 10 smaller lights were
steadily blinking off and on, he said. Cupples said the large
light, which did not appear to be moving very much, was not
round but more of an elongated oval s! hape. Mrs. Cupples said
she came out and "saw it twice. I didn't know what to make of
it." Her husband said the large light "did not illuminate the
surrounding area." Rather, he said, it was creating the
luminescence. The other smaller lights were not near the large
light, Cupples said. And they "moved around like a helicopter
would," except there was no sound, he added. By 10 p.m. the
lights were gone. Coincidentally, Cupples said he also saw two
brilliant "shooting stars" fly overhead during the sighting.

Dan Nance, a spokesman for Fort Polk and the Joint Readiness
Training Center, confirmed that A-10 aircraft were flying over
the Camp Claiborne range at approximately the same time as
Cupple's sighting. "They did drop flares, which could account
for the lights seen in the sky in that vicinity," Flare drops
were scheduled to end at 7:45 PM. Patrick Thompson, air traffic
manager for Alexandria International Airport, confirmed this.
He said the range "was active with flare drops" and that "they
light up the sky pretty good." However, Thompson said the
Cupples' sighting lasted until about 10 p.m., more than two
hours after the end of the flare run. The Town Talk, Alexandria
- Pineville / Byline: Andrew Griffin Published: Jan 19.02
Thanks to Farshores.

IOWA SAUCERS FLASHING LIGHTS

DUBUQUE -- The witness reports, "What we saw was clearly a UFO
with light blue flashing lights at 7:15 PM, on January 3, 2002.
There were four of us in the car driving on Highway 61, when we
saw the UFO come toward us as we drove along. It seemed to
change directions and go the way we were going for a few
seconds. It was only 50 feet above us so we got a good look. It
was saucer-shaped with a dome-like top. It acted like it wanted
us to stop the car. The flashing lights were very bright, as
they would flash on for a second, go off for about 1 and a half
to 2 seconds, and then back on again. The UFO was saucer-shaped
and had a dome-shaped top. The saucer had windows, 4, or 5 on
the side we could clearly see. The light seemed to be coming
out of these windows. Finally it started flying away from us
and it disappeared, so we thought. Then I saw the light blue
lights again in my rearview mirror, which followed us ! for
about six miles. The lights were not getting further away from
us as we drove on. By the time we drove into the city, it was
gone. We know what we saw and no one's going to tell us any
different.

MARION -- At 7:30 PM, on January 3, 2002, a few minutes after
the above sighting. The witness noticed four motionless sources
of light, flashing red, blue, and white. The one craft I could
see from my bedroom window, and I am looking at one as I type
this that is in the shape of a "+," but this may be due to the
window. At this time, which is now 9:02 PM, it still hasn't
moved from its spot. The other three remained motionless too,
but I cannot see hem now. I witnesses one ascending to above my
window's view, so I went outside, and it is still there. I can
see that both Saturn and Uranus are visible. Some would say
that these are planets. Well, there are two things wrong with
that. 1: there are four objects, not two. 2: What planets flash
blue and white, then occasionally red? They could be
helicopters. This town has only 26,000 people and the biggest
city in a 50 miles hasis only 100,000. Why woul! d four
helicopters hover over a small town not moving one inch in
three hours? Nothing of national importance is in this town.
Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC www.ufocenter.com.

MISSOURI CIGAR SHAPED OBJECT

LAKE OF THE OZARKS -- My friend first saw the object, a bright
light at 5:30 PM, on January 2, 2002, about half the size of
the moon or twice the size of Venus and larger than most plane
and helicopter lights I've seen. After rounding the corner I
was looking for the object and I saw it again, hovering about
the trees over an area where there are boat garages and little
else, near the Osage Beach City Hall, and across from Lake of
the Ozarks General Hospital. It looked to be approximately the
size of a large jet airliner, was very low, and appeared to be
ready to land. It didn't appear to have wings and had two blue
lights in the back underneath it, then two other clear lights
and two red lights toward the front, and of course the
extremely bright head light. We continued down the road but
were a bit shaken up by what we'd seen. I expected to hear an
explosion or something because I thought it was a jet plane
that was about to crash. There! was nothing to indicate that
anything had landed or anything else. The object was larger
than a helicopter and the one at the hospital was parked and
locked. Thanks to NUFORC

ARKANSAS OBJECT WITH TWO BEAM LIGHTS

VAN BUREN COUNTY -- Kaleeh Rodgers writes, "I was on my way
home from Church Wednesday Night January 16, 2002, and my
friend Carla was driving. I was sort of gazing out the window
in boredom when I saw an odd shaped object that had two
beam-lights that shot straight forward, like a flashlights
beam. It had a triangular hook on the bottom of it. This object
stood completely still, it didn't seem to move in the least.
Carla said something to me, and I looked at her to reply, but
when I looked back, the object that had stood so still had
disappeared into the dark night's sky. God Bless, Thanks to
Kaleeh Rodgers dc3_survivor@hotmail.co

CALIFORNIA SILVER ORBS

SACRAMENTO -- Jeff Challender writes, "Today, January 11, 2001,
was one of the most incredible days of my life. My wife, son,
and I were out house hunting today. As we sat at a red
stoplight, my son in the rear seat exclaimed, "What is that?" I
looked where he indicated, and there, coming from the north was
a silvery orb. It moved in our direction at very good speed.
The traffic light changed, but I didn't want to stop watching,
so I pulled up in a nearby parking lot (This was in Roseville,
a suburb of Sacramento, at 12:25 PM). From there we watched
this orb move almost directly over our position, where it came
to a complete stop!! It hovered for several minutes, and began
to move slowly to the west. After perhaps a minute or two, it
turned, and began to move back to the north from whence it came
in the first place. We watched it until it was lost in some
clouds. We were about to leave for our appointment, when Max !
shouted that there was another one. Sure enough, another
silvery orb, just like the first, was sailing along toward our
position from the north. We watched it do a near exact repeat
of the actions of the first. It got almost directly overhead,
and stopped! This one hovered for nearly five minutes before
slowly moving off to the north again. We watched this one until
we could no longer see it in the haze. Amazed, and somewhat
shocked, we continued to our appointment with our real estate
agent. We talked for an hour with the agent when yet another
silvery orb went streaking across the northern sky from east to
west. This one went so fast that it was gone in less than 10
seconds. I hollered to the others when I saw it, but this one
was gone before any of the others could find it. WOW!! What a
day!! I've seen UFOs before, but never three separate objects
in a day, and never for over 20 minutes. The rea! l pity is
that I hadn't brought along my camcorder. This would have made
a great film. This is one day I won't forget any time soon.
Thanks to Jeff Jefchall@worldnet.att.net

MCCHORD AIR FORCE BASE

Robert Collins reports Blue Book closed it's doors in December
1969, but yet here almost three years later Air Force Office of
Special Investigations (OSI) was still collecting and
classifying UFO reports. The names and events are real. On
October 14, 1972, Airman First Class (AIC) Steven Briggs and
Airman Dennis Hillsgeck were instructed to check the Tactical
Air Navigational (TACAN) facility located eight miles east of
McChord Air Force Base. The TACAN site was situated on
government land maintained by the United State Army, Ft. Lewis.
Briggs and Hillsgeck drove to the TACAN site at approximately
1300 hours. Upon their arrival, they opened the locked fence
surrounding the TACAN facility and entered the compound. Once
inside the compound, they opened the TACAN building and began
to conduct a systems check of the TACAN equipment. At 1400
hours, Briggs heard a strange sound outside the building that
sounded like a high pitch eng! ine. Briggs exited the building
to investigate and observed a saucer shaped object directly
above the TACAN building. Briggs watched as the object landed
just south of the TACAN compound. Briggs was startled by the
object and entered the TACAN building to summon Hillsgeck. Once
Hillsgeck and Briggs exited the building together, they
observed two "creatures" walking towards the fence. Briggs
returned to the building and telephoned (555) the base security
police. He yelled that they needed help at the TACAN site
because "intruders" were attempting to enter the facility. Sgt
David Holmes, the Law Enforcement Desk Sergeant, 62nd Security
Police Squadron, received the phone call and dispatched Sgt
Dwight Reid and AIC Michael Tash to the scene. It took the
security police patrol 17 minutes to travel to the TACAN site.

Upon their arrival, they observed Briggs and Hillsgeck standing
near their government vehicle. Both appeared to be in a daze.
Neither could speak. Sgt Reid summoned an USAF Ambulance to the
scene. Hillsgeck appeared to have been burnt around the face.
AIC Tash walked around the area and found marks in the soft
Washington state dirt. Then suddenly, Sgt Reid yelled to AIC
Tash that an object was directly over his head. A saucer shaped
object was hovering just above the TACAN facility. Sgt Reid
attempted to communicate to the security police law enforcement
office by using his Motorola HT-220 portable radio. However the
radio did not function. Sgt Reid then yelled for AIC Tash to
return to the police vehicle. Sgt Reid and AIC Tash retrieved
Briggs and Hillsgeck and drove from the scene. Approximately
one mile from the TACAN site, Sgt Reid was able to communicate
with the security police office, requesting a! ssistance and
declaring a "Covered Wagon." Four additional security policemen
arrived on scene, including, Sgt Darren Alexander and his
military dog-Champ. Sgt Alexander and Champ drove to the scene
and started to search the area. Approximately 400 yards south
of the TACAN site, Champ alerted. Sgt. Alexander observed two
"creatures" standing near a remote power station. Sgt.
Alexander yelled for the two "creatures" to stand and raise
their hands. Both creatures then moved towards Sgt. Alexander.

Sgt Alexander observed that one of the creatures was holding an
object, which Sgt. Alexander thought was a weapon. Sgt.
Alexander fired six rounds from his military issued Model 15,
.38 Caliber Revolver. After firing the shots, Sgt Alexander
returned to his vehicle and radioed Sgt Reid that he had fired
at the creatures. A Security Alert Team (similar to a police
SWAT) arrived. They conducted a search of the area and observed
the saucer shaped object sitting on the ground, directly east
of the power station. They circled the object and called for a
supervisor. Captain Henry Stone, Security Police Law
Enforcement, arrived on scene but the object departed just as
Captain Stone walked towards the object. The object flew off in
an easterly direction and was out of sight in a few seconds.
Office of Special Investigations agents arrived on scene and
conducted an investigation. Statements were taken from all
involved. Evid! ence was collected from the scene, to include
shell casings from the rounds fired by Sgt. Alexander. This
incident was classified as Top Secret and remained in the OSI
files as unsolved. Copyright 2001 by Robert Collins
shippeej@hereintown.net

AUSTRIA YELLOW-ORANGE UFO SEEN

VIENNA -- On Friday, January 11, 2002, at 5:50 PM, Herbert F.C.
stepped outside his home in the Hietzing section of the
capital, and then he "saw the object heading heavenward. I
heard several loud booms, and then I looked up and saw a bright
yellow-orange light." "At first I thought it was a passing
airplane. And then out of it came several smaller lights. I
called my son who was upstairs in his room. My 14-year-old son
went to his window and saw 'something like a star' rising
upward rapidly. A moment later, four more bright UFOs passed
directly over our house. These lights hovered briefly and then
departed to the north." Herbert added that he contacted the
Flugsicherung (Air Traffic Control) at Vienna's international
airport, but the controllers "had no reports of UFOs on their
radar screens at that time." Thanks to UFO ROUNDUP Vol. 7, #3
January 15, 2002 Editor: Joseph Tr! ainor.

NEW UFO STORE IS NOW OPEN The new UFO Store is open on our web
site with some of the best UFO books and paraphernalia
available. Help support UFO research by purchasing through us!
Filer's Files is dedicated to uncovering the truth about UFOs
and has sent them out free since January 1997. Your support is
needed to cover expenses, and when you shop in our store, you
get the satisfaction of quality products, with the knowledge
that you have helped support the search for the truth. Come
help our adventure, while supporting UFO research! Order online
today, at http://www.filersfiles.com/ufostore/index.htm

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new hour-long tape of UFOs
filmed on recent Shuttle video footage 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. I feel confident we
could go into a court of law and convince any jury that there
are UFOs moving at high speed around the 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 $35 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2002 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the complete
files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its
editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. 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. Caution,
most of these are initial reports and require further
investigation.

Regards, George Filer

[UFO UpDates thanks John Hayes for relaying this issue -
  distribution server problems delayed this 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                   Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:13:07 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:44:17 -0500
Subject: Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hall


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >To: "- UFO UpDates Subscribers -":;
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: New Hampshire Visited Again - Hatch
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 11:33:57 -0500

 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:29:35 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: New Hampshire Visited Again

 >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto

 >>Source: Rockingham News - Plaistow, New Hampshire

 >>http://www.coaststar.com/news/rock/r1_25d.htm

 >>Area UFO sightings not yet identified by officials

 >>By Jeff Kaplan, rockinghamnews@seacoastonline.com

 >>FREMONT -- Unidentified flying objects are not unusual in
 >>Rockingham County. At an increasing pace over the last decade,
 >>UFOs have been sighted performing a gymnast's repertoire of
 >>aerial maneuvers. The Web site www.ufopage.com lists 33
 >>documented sightings since 1995.

 >>Last Thursday New Hampshire may have been visited again.

 >>At 10:04 p.m. Fremont Police Officer H.D. Wood was dispatched to
 >>Main Street to investigate a report of two objects hovering
 >>silently in the air. The objects were described as "bright and
 >>full of lights," according to the police report.

 ><snip>

 >Hello all:

 >I'm not about to count the words in this newspaper article, lets
 >just say its several paragraphs at least.

 >One simple question: For all the local color, did any of the
 >newsmen, witnesses, cops or whoever say a single word about the
 >_shapes_ of the objects?

 >I would ask for apparent shapes, first thing, but that's just
 >silly old me.


A fellow after my own heart (except I drink more bourbon than
beer).

Yes, why do reporters never ask the critical questions that
would help to determine whether the object was likely to be
something prosaic, or something anomalous? Shape, any visible
surface or structural features, acceleration, flight pattern and
motions (straight line, oscillatory, erratic), light patterns
(glow, pulsation, blinking), etc.

The devil is in the details, not in the fact that a witness
thinks he saw something unusual unless he can articulate why he
thinks so.


  - 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                          Mothman Prophecies Movie

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:08:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:45:47 -0500
Subject: Mothman Prophecies Movie


Listfolk,

Helene and I saw The Mothman Prophecies movie last night and
loved it. There are very few great Fortean films, but this is
surely one of them. It's got everything - genuine creepiness, a
thrilling, suspenseful storyline, intelligence, and all sorts of
elements ufologists and Forteans will recognize. Director Mark
Pellington is to be commended for resisting the temptation to
turn John Keel's book into yet another dopey creature or
science-fiction movie.

I wonder how many of you who've seen the movie caught the
deep-inside-the-ufological-beltway use of the name "Gordon
Smallwood" for the Will Patton character (playing someone
loosely based on contactee Woody Derenberger).


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                     Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:47:01 EST
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:51:50 -0500
Subject: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols


Request For Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols

Dear List, Errol,

The project previously listed and discussed is at the very
beginning stages. I am therefore asking all of you to please
read this entire post, and lend us a helping hand.

First, a little background. This is a beginning, and I am  not a
researcher except of my own experiences. I am depending on the
experts at our medical group to define the study. They too, are
not researchers of this phenomena.

There is however, another important issue here, about which I
was not aware, and was not told by my internist recently.

This is a large medical group. So large and so popular (because
of the caliber of physicians) that they have an arrangement with
one of the best hospitals hereabouts. The arrangement is
complete affiliation. The hospital has all the latest equipment
and is just below the level of the Westchester County Medical
Center, in case anyone is interested. That's a pretty high level
folks. We do not have a helipad, though... chame, chame, chame!

As a result of the group's size and success at treatment, most
of the patients are long term; my internist has been trying to
make me healthy for 35 years. It's a job. He's literally saved
my wife's life on two occasions. With such long term patients
being attended by their internists for so long, a great deal of
personal data is transferred to the internist. Some of it _very_
personal, and which would not ordinarily be discussed with 'just
a doctor.'

He called to tell me that there are many like me, who've
confided in their internists or other doctors at the group. As a
result, their interest in this conundrum was boosted up a few
notches. I suppose that I threw them over the fence. And as a
further result, the number of perceived abductees is larger than
I dreamed. The fact is that no further volunteers are needed.
And even with those few who wished to take part in the project,
are not needed but will be used. There will be no
'non-abductees' in this project, except those whom the group
selects. And these will have the same or similar 'complaints' as
the abductees, but with no history of abduction, sightings of
UFOs and etc.

Last, and most important, we seek the assistance, by way of
suggestions from you, the much maligned researchers, as to any
ideas you may have which may assist in making this project
satisfactory to as many as possible. We even look for protocols
which might be useful. Anything. _Anything!_ And this request is
from the group. I have set up a special email address for such
responses, or simply use UpDates, that is, if the information is
of interest to all. You decide.

By the way, it was not me who maligned researchers, it was
Gesundt. And he was in his cups.

Please help us... on or off-List... doesn't matter. But we need
your help. Those who write off-List will receive my private
telephone number, at my discretion, if it becomes necessary to
speak by landline. Or, I will call you. But for crimey sake,
don't just sit there like lumps on a log, help us out.

The worst thing which could happen is for some of you to bitch
and moan that the project was not 'done right'. Well, now you
have the opportunity to contribute to the study and make sure
it's as right as it can be.

I am disappointed that the only response was prematurely
ejaculated and that not one of you said squat. Now for my
petulant and childish comment:

If this project is so uninteresting, or for any other reasons,
not something which is exciting to this List, then I shall not
post anything about it here. Not out of spite, but out of a
complete and total frustration with you guys. And then, watch
out, because out comes Gesundt in all his drunken fury. I am
serious about the first comment. Take part or do as you've done
thus far, keep quite. Is it fear or disinterest? Or is it that
you agree with the comments made thus far? Your response, or
lack of it, will help me decide a very great deal. A very great
deal. Don't disappoint us or you. Do something.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                    Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:57:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:52:58 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Salvaille


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:26:41 -0600


 >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:12:25 +0000

 >>>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto"<ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:44:40 -0500

 >>>>From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >>>>Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Hynek likened it to a spectrograph on page 21 of his 'The UFO
 >Experience'. One would not use a spectrograph that has not been
 >validated to observe a distant galaxy and then trust the results
 >of that observation. The unvalidated spectrometer might just be
 >capable of creating entertaining but inaccurate smears of
 >separated light... but a validated instrument would be trusted
 >without question because its calibration has been assured. Do we
 >have instruments to trust? I think we must. Way out on the
 >periphery of this thing, I feel I know three.

<snip>

Hello Alfred and all.

Well, don't keep us waiting. What are those three validated
instruments?


Best,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:03:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer


 >Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:44:46 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:25:16 -0600

 >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:35:10 CST
 >>>Subject: Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 ><snip>

 >>I think John Keel has contributed his share of controversy and
 >>nonsense to this subject, probably more so than many. This is
 >>really a case of the pot's calling the kettle black.

 ><snip>

 >Jerry, Chris, et al

 >I think someone should post the first sentence or two or graf of
 >The Mothman Prophecies here. I'd do it myself, but my copy is
 >presently in storage and/or passage.


Here we go:

"Fingers of lighting tore holes in the black skies as an angry
cloudburst drenched the surrealistic landscape. It was 3 am on a
cold wet morning in late November 1967, and the little houses
scattered along the dirt road winding through the hills of West
Virginia were all dark. Some seemed unoccupied and in the final
stages of decay. Others were unpainted, neglected, forlorn...

"Along the road came a stranger in a land were strangers were
rare and suspect. He walked up to the door of a crumbling
farmhouse and hammered. After a long moment a light blinked on
and a young woman appeared, drawing a cheap mail-order bathrobe
around her. She opened the door a crack and her sleep-swollen
face winced with fear as she stared at the apparition on her
doorstep ..."

 >But talk about your purple UFO prose!

But how about this for purple prose - can you guess who wrote
it?

"...John A. Keel, a veteran critic of ETH whose work we have
long admired... Keel has probably spent more time in the field
than any other private researcher. This fact has afforded him
the opportunity to view the UFO mystery from the inside, and not
from the distorted perspective of most UFO literature, written
usually to enhance belief in interplanetary visitors, which
blithely ignores the evidence inconsiderate enough not to fit
the author's preconceptions."

--
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                    Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:42:18 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:06:13 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Lehmberg


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:57:57 -0500

 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:26:41 -0600

 ><snip>

 >>Hynek likened it to a spectrograph on page 21 of his 'The UFO
 >>Experience'. One would not use a spectrograph that has not been
 >>validated to observe a distant galaxy and then trust the results
 >>of that observation. The unvalidated spectrometer might just be
 >>capable of creating entertaining but inaccurate smears of
 >>separated light... but a validated instrument would be trusted
 >>without question because its calibration has been assured. Do we
 >>have instruments to trust? I think we must. Way out on the
 >>periphery of this thing, I feel I know three.

 ><snip>


 >Hello Alfred and all.

 >Well, don't keep us waiting. What are those three validated
 >instruments?


They're people, Serge (...and I'd like mine with a twist? <g>.)
Quality people (qualitates mit pradikat!), people who have
educated themselves, people who have demonstrated a sincerity,
people who show some talent for rationality, good sense, and
observation. These people are cogent, cognitive, experienced
and open. They are serious, sound, sentient, and suspicious
with good reason. They are near legion. They are also the
exact same 'kind' of people that Hynek alluded too. I know
three I have some confidence in (four counting myself <g>), and
many more that don't make my personal cut. You very likely know
some yourself... People, Serge. All there are. Here _or_
there.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                           SDI - Tonight's Line-up

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:24:43 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:24:43 -0500
Subject: SDI - Tonight's Line-up

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                 Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Coleman

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:24:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:49:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Coleman


 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology

<snip>

 >But how about this for purple prose - can you guess who wrote
 >it?

Sounds like Jerome Clark, to me.

How about this one? I wasn't going for prose but to just capture
the true nature of the man, in my newest:

"'Ufology is just another name for demonology,=B2 John Keel told me,
a week before the September 11th attack on the World Trade Center,
which occurred just a couple of miles from where he lives.'"


Loren Coleman
http://www.lorencoleman.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                 Mothman Prophecies Heavy On Horror, Chills

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:16:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:16:55 -0500
Subject: Mothman Prophecies Heavy On Horror, Chills


Source: The Scarborough Mirror - Toronto

Sunday, January 27, 2002

Film Review
by
Stuart Green


Mothman Prophecies Heavy On Horror, Chills

Its not easy to make a monster movie that never shows the
monster. It takes a certain skill on the director's part to make
us believe there is this menacing being or beast or entity
that's threatening and tormenting our protagonists without
relying on special effects and pup pets to give the monster
form.

But director Mark Pellington has done just that with the
effective and chilling supernatural thriller 'The Mothman
Prophecies'.

Based on actual events in West Virginia more than 30 years ago,
the film is the eeriest, smartest and most unpredictable tale
of other-worldly happenings since 'The Sixth Sense', with the
added impact of having its roots in real life happenings.

'The Mothman Prophecies' crosses 'X-Files'-like paranormal
investigation and the compelling story of a man trying to get
over the death of his wife some two years earlier.

Richard Gere stars as the grieving widower, a journalist named
John Klein, who gets lost on his way to an interview and ends up
in Point Pleasant, W.Va., some 600 miles from his intended
destination with no recollection of how he got there.

But he, quickly discovers that being lost and without a
functioning automobile is the least of his troubles. It seems
there have been all sorts of strange goings on in the town
that local police are at a loss to explain.

And the more he hears about those goings on, the closer to home
they hit. Apparently dozens of townsfolk have been reporting
seeing a strange moth or bird-like creature and hearing odd
squeals emanating from their telephone receivers.

Klein is particularly struck by the Mothman sightings as his
wife claimed to have had the same vision shortly before she
died.

He quickly teams up with a local cop (Laura Linney) and puts his
investigative journal ism skills to use as he attempts to
discover the reality behind the fantastic stories.

The investigation leads him to a local mystery man and a Chicago
author who reveal the sightings are premonitions of a tragic
event that Klein is deter mined to prevent.

Based on John A. Keel's 1975 book of the same name, 'The Mothman
Prophecies' is part thriller, part love story and part urban
legend.

But as realized by Pellington (director of the equally powerful
crime thriller 'Arlington Road'), it's almost all horror. The
former music video maverick turned feature film director has
obviously. spent a great deal of time watching movies like 'The
Exorcist' and 'Carrie' or anything by Alfred Hitchcock that
effectively use lighting, sets and music to evoke terror. We
only ever catch brief glimpses of the Mothman and even those
glimpses are not definitive in portraying the creature.

Gore and Linney as the hapless duo trying to get to the bottom
of the mystery are great as a Mulder and Scully team; he a
believer, she a skeptic. But it's Will Patton as a local who is
the conduit between the real and supernatural worlds who gives
the film's most dynamic performance. He's angry, confused and
scared to death of what's going on around him and it shows.

Pellington uses him wisely to punctuate an already well-crafted
movie.

'The Mothman Prophecies' is both creepy and captivating... and
jump-out-of-your seat scary as hell too.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 26

                     Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:29:25 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 18:09:32 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Hatch


 >Readers might like to take a look at the 'Strange Days...Indeed'
 >line-up for tonight:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

 >ebk


Dear EBK:


I hope I'm not on the roster.

I'm way too incapacitated (due to overwork) to get on the radio
without a spell checker.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                  Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:26:59 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:38:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols -


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:47:01 EST
 >Subject: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Request For Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols

 >Dear List, Errol,

 >The project previously listed and discussed is at the very
 >beginning stages. I am therefore asking all of you to please
 >read this entire post, and lend us a helping hand.

<snip>

The E-Mail address for this project has been set up.

It is:

StudyProjectA@aol.com

It's now or never ... (Elvis)

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                Re: (was UFO UpDate: Welcome to The List (was

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 14:56:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 14:56:09 -0500
Subject: Re:  (was UFO UpDate: Welcome to The List (was

Please read the following - it will help us both.

Errol Bruce-Knapp,

Moderator, UFO UpDates

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


UFO UpDates is a manually operated E-mail List.

Each message is highlighted, copied, pasted, re-formatted and
posted to the List by the moderator/operator - functions that are
similar to those of people in print who edit and lay-out 'Letters
To The  Editor'. Creating easy to read 'style', uniform layouts,
catching most of the typos, avoiding most nastiness, off-topic
messages and spam are the objectives.

A subscription does not automatically mean a message you submit
for posting will appear on the List.

UpDates is a free service - you pay nothing. In return, if you
do choose to post to the List, you are asked to abide by the
following:


Posting Rules


 1.    Do _not_ use the 'formatted text' features of your e-mail
program. No colours, no fancy fonts, no italics or bolding, no
fancy quoting designs or html styling. Plain ASCII is what
UpDates uses. Messages that are not plain text will not be
posted.

 2.    Line-length

Please make your lines no more than 65 characters long

--------------------This line is 65 characters-------------------

Longer lines are wrapped by various pieces of software along the Net and leave
awkward
and eye-jarring line lengths.


 3.    Attribution

When responding to a message from the List, _always_ include the
four line 'header' from the body of that message at the start
of _your_ message - eg.:

>Date: 15 Jan 02 00:00:01 EST
>From: Subscriber <Genghis@mukluk.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Grays are Grey Area

Again - it's at the beginning of the 'body' of the message you
are responding to and below the UpDates headers.


 4.    Quoting

_Always_ quote from the message to which you are responding.

Quotes should come _before_ you key your response.

Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
first character. It should look like this:

>Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the
>first character. It should look like this:

No spaces before or after the '>'

Please remove the '>' from blank lines.

Keep quoted material from previous messages to a minimum:  Just
quote enough text to let people know what you are referring to.

Messages that do not conform to the required quoting protocol or
contain excessive quoting will not be posted to UpDates.

Most modern E-Mail software will allow the user to click a
'Reply' button and automatically open a new window, with the
message being responded to inserted with universal quote-mark
(>) at the beginning of each line.

When 'Reply' is clicked, some E-Mail software will insert a line
which reads:

'On 13 Feb 99 at 00:00:01 EST, UFO UpDates [or 'you'] wrote: '

If your program does this, please remove it - UFO UpDates did
not _write_ the message - it merely passed it to the List.


 5.    Don't send 'personal' responses to the list that should
be sent directly to the original author.  Send a message to the
list only if it contains new information that you want
_everyone_ to see.

Messages that contain what the Moderator considers to be
personal attacks or 'flames' will not be posted to the List.


 6.    URLs (Web Site addresses)  _must_ include 'http://' and
be on one line. The Archive software will make the URL a
'click-able' link to that address in your archived message.

 7.    To un-subscribe, send a _new_ message with 'Un-subscribe'
as the 'Subject: '

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







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                   Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:47:12 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:15:07 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Mortellaro



 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:42:18 -0600


 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@rocler.qc.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:57:57 -0500

 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees?
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 16:26:41 -0600

 >><snip>

 >>>Hynek likened it to a spectrograph on page 21 of his 'The UFO
 >>>Experience'. One would not use a spectrograph that has not been
 >>>validated to observe a distant galaxy and then trust the results
 >>>of that observation. The unvalidated spectrometer might just be
 >>>capable of creating entertaining but inaccurate smears of
 >>>separated light... but a validated instrument would be trusted
 >>>without question because its calibration has been assured. Do we
 >>>have instruments to trust? I think we must. Way out on the
 >>>periphery of this thing, I feel I know three.

 >><snip>


 >>Hello Alfred and all.

 >>Well, don't keep us waiting. What are those three validated
 >>instruments?


 >They're people, Serge (...and I'd like mine with a twist? <g>.)
 >Quality people (qualitates mit pradikat!), people who have
 >educated themselves, people who have demonstrated a sincerity,
 >people who show some talent for rationality, good sense, and
 >observation. These people are cogent, cognitive, experienced
 >and open. They are serious, sound, sentient, and suspicious
 >with good reason. They are near legion. They are also the
 >exact same 'kind' of people that Hynek alluded too. I know
 >three I have some confidence in (four counting myself <g>), and
 >many more that don't make my personal cut. You very likely know
 >some yourself... People, Serge. All there are. Here _or_
 >there.

Dear Al, Serge, List and Errol,

Indeed - in spades. It's all we have in'it? The word of people
who are either self educated, formally educated, sane and sound
of spirit as well as mind. The kind of people who are sincere,
who've likely been psychoanalyzed and found to be credible, that
is, found not to have mental illness(es). The kind of people who
come forward, after a near lifetime of living in the closet.
Many cannot. If they did, they would likely not be able to put
bread on the table.

After serving the Hi Tech industry as a consultant for more than
25 years, and semiretiring, the word got out about my
experiences. Wanna know how many clients I had before coming
out, Serge? Fifteen ... that's 15. Wanna know how many kept me
on after word got out? Two. Cardiac Pacemaker and one other who
shall remain nameless as a result of nondisclosure. And I told
them as soon as the bovine excrement hit the big windmill. They
stuck with me. Two. I lost a ton of income. Thank God I prepared
for such an eventuality.

Why do I mention this? Simply because it is my sincere opinion
that you have _no idea_ how many people are in that closet. I
have an inkling. And it is a big, very big number.

Cogito, ergo ( I think it goes ... Zoom!)


Love,

Jim







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                        Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:31:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:18:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 01:54:30 EST
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 23:02:08 EST
 >>Subject: Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads]
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Hi David,

 >An excellent post that was well done!! I eagerly await the
 >response from the skeptics using non-magical thinking.....
 >However I suspect that they will use magical thinking and try
 >and sell us on the fact that it is not.

 >I always thought the Mogul theory was deflated to begin with!


I completely agree that David's analysis is right on and very
well done. However, I must again reiterate other facts that make
it totally incorrect to suggest that this one balloon was what
Brazel found, and was observed in situ by Marcel and Cavitt, and
had something to do with the Mogul Program.

A. Many Evening Newspapers on July 8, 1947 (from Chicago West)
noted that the material was found by Brazel "sometime last
week". That alone rules out Mogul Balloon wreckage since, as has
been noted,it would have been very badly deteriorated if it had
been out there since mid June.

B. The July 9 RDR article about Brazel, which clearly reflects
his having been reprogrammed. as indicated by the Proctors, the
people in Corona with whom he discussed his find on July 5, his
other neighbors, his son, claims that the wreckage covered an
area 250 yards in diameter. One balloon won't do it.

C. Marcel when I first spoke to him in 1978 and then interviewed
him for 'UFOs Are Real' in 1979 - both long before Roswell
became a household name, described a debris field perhaps 3/4
mile long and a few hundred feet across. Clearly more than one
balloon, despite Cavitt's sudden memory recall of it just being
one balloon covering 20feet square and easily fitting into one
vehicle.. which it would have if it was only one balloon.

D. If Brazel had only found one balloon and radar target, he
would, if he bothered with it at all, not finding any "return
to" tag and seeing nothing special about it, have brought it
into Roswell. It was a difficult trip. There would have been no
reason for Marcel and Cavitt in their separate vehicles to
follow Brazel the long hard way back to the ranch. There would
have been nothing there. Nothing to see, no reason to stay over
night. Bill Brazel would have not found anything more, as he
did, on horseback later on.

E. How does one weather balloon and radar target provide thin
very strong memory metal, I-beams having the weight of balsa
wood but impossible to break, cut, or burn,with strange symbols.
Radar targets were very easy to break up. They would not have
excited the sheriff, nor Marcel, nor Blanchard, not even
Cavitt... nor Jesse Jr.

F. Lt. General Twining was head of AMC whose people at
Alamogordo had access to many balloons and who launched the
cover story balloons at Alamogordo for the presson July 9.
Twining had already been tasked to look into flying discs. He
arrived in NM on July 7. The fix was in.

G. In view of the above facts coupled with David's oustanding
analysis, what was in Ramey's office was not what was
discovered on the Foster Ranch by Mac Brazel and observed out
there by Marcel and Cavitt. Bait and switch worked very well.

Pretty soon somebody will venture the notion that Marcel never
was out at the ranch and and he and the sherrif's family and
everybody else,lied about seeing anything, bringing anything
back etc etc ad nauseum. After all he was just a flunky who
happened to be the intelligence officer for the only Atomic
Bombing group in the world. In addition, he was obsviously
psychic and knew that if he told me a totally made up story he
would become famous.

Balderdash.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                 Telepathic Football Threatens Chilean Teens

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 23:13:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:22:18 -0500
Subject: Telepathic Football Threatens Chilean Teens


VILLA SAN RAFAEL, Chile (Wireless Flash) -- Forget Bigfoot or
the Mothman. The newest paranormal creature is a four-legged
football. Believe it or not, a creature matching that exact
description has been sighted threatening teenagers in Villa San
Rafael, Chile.

Researchers at the Calama UFO Center in Chile claim the
mysterious menace has wings, a face like a large bulldog and is
"shaped like a rugby football with legs."

Paranormal researcher Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo isn't sure if
the creature is one of those goat-sucking chupacabras, but
admits both animals telepathically communicate with humans.

The winged football is just one of hundreds of strange creatures
that have been terrorizing Chile since 1999 and Dr.
Sanchez-Ocejo suspects the mysterious beings are entering Chile
through a dimensional doorway.

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

See story photos and sketch at:

http://www.geocities.com/ufomiami.geo/CREATURE.html


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                             New Zealand Returns

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 23:59:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:34:39 -0500
Subject: New Zealand Returns


Skeptics! Wake Up!

I have now posted my analysis of the flashing light filmed
during the (formerly) famous New Zealand sightings of December
31, 1978. This is added to the previously available 'squid boat'
sighting information.

http://brumac.8k.com

Instead of arguing over sightings for which there is minimal
evidence (e.g., witness testimony, maybe a photo or two, etc.),
argue over a sighting which has more evidence than one can
imagine:

_Two_ tape-recordings made _in_real_time during the sightings,
5 professional eyewitnesses (pilot, copilot, news crew)
16 mm professional color movie film,
Radar Detection (ground for the flashing light,  airborne
for the squid boat sighting)

These are quite possibly the most documented civilian sightings
in history. And my claim is simple:

1) these sightings have not been explained

2) there are no conventional explanations for the film

3) certainly seems that TRUFOs were involved.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                                     Re:

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 23:59:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:39:37 -0500
Subject: Re:


Skeptics! Wake Up!

I have now posted my analysis of the flashing light filmed
during the (formerly) famous New Zealand sightings of December
31, 1978. This is added to the previously available 'squid boat'
sighting information.

http://brumac.8k.com

Instead of arguing over sightings for which there is minimal
evidence (e.g., witness testimony, maybe a photo or two, etc.),
argue over a sighting which has more evidence than one can
imagine:

_Two_ tape-recordings made _in_real_time during the sightings,
5 professional eyewitnesses (pilot, copilot, news crew)
16 mm professional color movie film,
Radar Detection (ground for the flashing light,  airborne
for the squid boat sighting)

These are quite possibly the most documented civilian sightings
in history. And my claim is simple:

1) these sightings have not been explained

2) there are no conventional explanations for the film

3) certainly seems that TRUFOs were involved.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                      Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:43 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:39:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak


Sorry about the extreme length of this response, but lots of
important points are touched upon. It's been broken into two
parts.

Part I:

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Hutchinson

 >>>Brazel told the truth. He was used to finding piebald (painted)
 >>>weather balloons

 >>How do you know that's what he had found?

 >In his interview with the RDR, he mentioned that he had found on
 >two other occasions, "weather observation balloons". His use of
 >the term "observation" indicates that he had at least a passing
 >knowledge of the typical piebald balloon used by meteorologists-
 >knowledge gained, no doubt, when he turned in the balloons for
 >the $5 reward.

I still don't understand how you managed to deduce from this
that he had previously found "painted" balloons (are you
psychic?) and how these were somehow so highly different from
the balloon he said he found, that he ended up disclaiming at
the end of his interview that "what he found this time did not
in _any way_ resemble either of these" other two weather
balloons.

Besides, according to Brazel's daughter, Bessie Schreiber, they
had previously found weather balloons with reward tags,
suggesting these were radiosonde's, not bare piebald balloons.

 >>>- not unpainted, 'smoky grey' neoprene high
 >>>altitude balloons. Standard weather balloon systems did not use
 >>>Rawins. They were tracked visually, and sent back data via a
 >>>transponder. Finally, they were tagged for a $5 return. If you
 >>>consider what the wreckage of a portion of flight 4 looked like,
 >>>especially with a shredded Rawin thrown in, compared to a
 >>>brightly painted weather balloon, then we can understand why the
 >>>true identity was not obvious to either Brazel or Marcel.

I didn't comment on this before, but if the balloons carried a
"transponder", these were radiosondes. They were not tracked
visually (except maybe initially) but by radio direction
receivers. That way they could also determine wind direction and
speed at various altitudes when the balloons were no longer
visible. One purpose of using parachutes to lower the
instruments after the balloons popped or deflated and also
attaching reward tags, was so that the instruments would be
returned for reuse.

The balloons used to loft the radiosonde instrument package were
not typically "painted" or colored, since they weren't tracked
visually. They were the same non-pigmented, "milky white" 350
gram neoprene meteorological balloons also used by the early
Moguls. Hence we would not expect any physical difference in the
appearance of the balloons Brazel previously found vs. what he
claims he found in the Roswell incident, not that this makes a
whole lot of difference. A balloon is still obviously going to
be a balloon.

 >>So you are saying a kid who has previously only seen red and
 >>green balloons wouldn't recognize a balloon if it were some
 >>other color? > >It was not just the color. First of all, the
typical piebald >weather balloon was a single envelope system.
When it came down >to earth, it would land more-or-less intact.

This is just gibberish. What the hell is a "single envelope
system?" The neoprene balloons were exactly the same on typical
radiosondes as those used on the early Moguls. And apparently
Brazel had previously found radiosondes, since his daughter said
the balloons carried reward tags.

Whether neoprene weather balloons came down intact or not seems
to be largely a matter of chance. They degraded rapidly in
sunlight, became very brittle in the extreme cold at high
altitude, and usually popped or fragmented. Some slowly deflated
and did come down more or less intact.

 >The lower part of
 >the NYU train of 30-odd balloons, reflectors and payload, OTOH,
 >was intangled in rough terrain, shredding some of the balloons
 >and Rawins. After a Rawin or two and the ballast had broken off,
 >the rest of the train flew off.

I have dealt with this scenario in my new thread, "Mogul
shredded." The scenario Bruce presents, when analyzed
_logically_ and in detail, cannot possibly account for what was
actually displayed in Fort Worth or what witnesses described
from the field. See new post for excruciating details.

 >The result was small pieces of a balloon material Mac had not
 >encountered before - rather than a single, reasonably intact
 >envelope. The Rawin(s) were also beat up- ripped and broken.
 >This is not what he had found twice before.

Except there were no small pieces of balloon in the Fort Worth
photos, just an intact balloon. Furthermore Bruce's scenario
calls for evidence of more than one shredded Rawin in the
photos. But one Rawin accounts for _everything_ in the photos.
It all adds up to exactly one Rawin. It is impossible to explain
how exactly one shredded Rawin could be left behind while the
other Rawins escaped completely unscathed. See "Mogul shredded"
for discussion.

 >>That seems to be what you are saying. Two grown men
 >>couldn't tell they had found a balloon. Blanchard at the base
 >>couldn't recognize a balloon either, nor I imagine other people
 >>there who probably saw the debris.

 >I keep in mind that the key to the whole incident was trying to
 >solve the mystery of the 'Flying Disks'. Like the Circleville
 >farmer, Marcel thought that the debris was the solution. The
 >question was not, then, "is this balloon material" but rather is
 >this what people have been seeing, and reporting, as a 'Flying
 >Disk'.

Except Marcel and others, like Rickett in his office, and Gen.
Exon, made statements to the effect that the material was "not
of this Earth." Marcel's son also recounted how his father woke
them up in the middle of the night because he was excited about
the flying saucer that had been found. It's hard to imagine a
grown man waking his family to show them obvious tinfoil, paper,
Scotch tape, balsa wood, and rubber balloons, unless, of course,
you are in Debunker Denial.

 >To answer a bit more literally - what Marcel brought in was some
 >shredded fragments of a balloon ("the biggest was about the size
 >of a basketball" - Bessie Brazel Schreiber)

But these "shredded fragments of a balloon" aren't in the Fort
Worth photos.

 >- not a 'complete'
 >balloon.

Then why do the photos seem to show a complete, relatively
intact singular balloon?

 >It was also liberally mixed with the remains of the
 >Rawin. Unless you knew precisely what this came from, it would
 >be hard for Marcel- or anyone else - to immediately conclude
 >that the debris came from two separate items.

I'm sorry, but this is so incredibly stupid, it's laughable.

 >>Incidentally, Marcel was quite familiar with electronics, being
 >>a radio ham. So if there had been a radiosonde in the debris, he
 >>probably would have recognized it.

 >Possibly - this, or the ballast, could be the mysterious 'black
 >box' that Cavitt is reputed to have taken back with him.

The ballast should have been cut loose on descent and dropped
many miles away, according to Mogul engineering diagrams. The
Air Force and Charles Moore of Mogul tried to ascribe the "black
box" to the black radiosonde battery packs. One trouble with
this is Marcel, the old radio ham, would certainly have
recognized it as such from the wires emerging from the pack or
electrical contacts on the surface of any battery pack. See
"Mogul shredded."

 >>He had also taken a
 >>month-long radar intelligence course at the end of the war and
 >>one of his job titles was radar-intelligence officer. He would
 >>no doubt be familiar with the foil/paper chaff used in radar
 >>jamming, since part of his course involved radar
 >>countermeasures.

 >Immaterial -

Amazing how you blithely dismiss this point with the wave of
your hand as "immaterial." Even if Marcel knew nothing of radar
targets, he could have reasoned by analogy with what he did
know. The obvious similarity between the material used to make
radar chaff (paper/foil) and radar targets (paper/foil) could
logically lead to the conclusion that he was dealing with
another type of radar device. Paper/foil was also used in common
civilian items like chewing gum and fiberglass insulation.
Certainly, he would not jump to the conclusion that it was
something unearthly. Neither would Col. Blanchard for that
matter.

 >No matter what he found, had it been an alien ship,
 >could have had an earthly analog. Again - what Marcel found was,
 >in his mind, the solution to the 'Flying Disk' question.

This is so garbled, I don't know what's being said here. Marcel
thought they had found a flying saucer of unearthly origin
because the _physical properties_ of the material did not match
anything made by man, not because he had allegedly never seen a
radar target or weather balloon before. Marcel was not the only
person to describe such properties either.

I would like to reemphasize this point. If there had been
nothing to back up Marcel's story, it would have been dismissed
long ago as the ravings of a single loony. Roswell is _not_ just
the story of Jesse Marcel. There are a lot of witnesses and
documentation backing up Marcel's story (see, e.g., "Mogul
shredded" for how a computer analysis of the Fort Worth photos
clearly supports Marcel's story of a balloon and target being
substituted by Ramey to get the press off their backs).

 >>So here's the scenario you seem to be trying to paint. Marcel
 >>comes across some obvious balloon material, but supposedly can't
 >>recognize it because it is grey. He is also completely unable to
 >>recognize aluminum foil laminated to paper, even though it's the
 >>same stuff used in the radar chaff, or to wrap chewing gum for
 >>that matter. He also apparently couldn't recognize balsa wood
 >>and Scotch tape, two more "exotic" materials used to make the
 >>Rawins.

 >>From this he jumps to the conclusion that he must have found
 >>a flying saucer.

 >Yep.

The standard debunking line. Debunkers are such a gullible
bunch, going through incredible, contortions of logic to support
their religious beliefs.

There are so many things so patently absurd with this theory it
would take too long to cover them all. Let's just mention three.
First, others backed up Marcel's descriptions of anomalous
debris, including a general (Exon), who likewise said this was
the crash of a spacecraft. How could so many people, some not
even knowing one another, be so wrong in exactly the same way?

Second, Cavitt was with Marcel and claims to have instantly
recognized the debris as coming from a weather balloon. Seeing
that his friend Marcel was obviously going gah gah over tinfoil,
paper, balsa, and rubber balloons and jumping to the conclusion
this was an unearthly flying saucer, why didn't Cavitt shake
Marcel real hard and say, "Jesse, it's just a goddamn weather
balloon, for crying out loud!" And why didn't Cavitt brief Col.
Blanchard of same when he got back to the base? Why would Cavitt
remain mute?

Third, even if we assume Marcel went into a fugue state and kept
pushing that this was a real flying saucer leading to the
subsequent melt-down and public embarrassment of his superiors,
why do we see absolutely _no_ evidence of this in Marcel's
subsequent service record? He would have been branded a fool, an
incompetent, unreliable, somebody who couldn't think straight,
and this surely would have shown up in some fashion in his
subsequent service evaluations and assignments. But no, quite
the opposite. See below for more details.

 >It was not that he couldn't recognize, or at least, make a
 >guess, on the identity of an individual piece taken out of the
 >context, but that as a whole, he had 'solved' the 'Flying Disk'
 >puzzle. And despite your treatise on Rawins in the Southwest, he
 >obviously did not recognize what he had as a radar target.

 >>Somehow he convinces base commander Blanchard of the same thing,
 >>and Blanchard, for unimaginable reasons, issues the press
 >>release.

 >What if our intrepid Major, having 'solved' the puzzle, bypasses
 >Blanchard and gets Haut to write and release the news on his
 >(Marcel's) authority?

Classic insubordination, a court-martial offense. This would be
entirely outside of standard protocol for the issuing of major
press releases, all of which were cleared through Blanchard's
office. That would have been it for both Marcel and Haut right
there.

 >No version of the release mentions
 >Blanchard, but it does identify Marcel.

So? It also mentions the Sheriff and rancher being involved as
principles in the case. Did they also have a hand in writing the
release?

Furthermore it is _false_ that Marcel was identified in all
reported versions of the press release. Marcel was not
identified by United Press, whose telexes and stories spoke
initially only of the intelligence office, "a major" in the
office, and multiple "intelligence officers" being involved.

The press various release versions also mention the "flying
disk" being flown to "higher headquarters" by B-29. How did
Marcel manage that without authorization from above? Did he also
commandeer a plane or convince still others to go along with his
self-promoting, egotistical scheme? Marcel must have been a
criminal mastermind.

Finally Marcel was never blamed by anybody for the press
release. United Press always referred to it as Col. Blanchard's
release and said it was Blanchard who used the term "flying
disk." (Apparently the evil Marcel had also hoodwinked Blanchard
with his fantasies that rubber, tinfoil, etc. came from a real
flying disk.)

In contrast, after Ramey began identifying the object as a
weather balloon and radar target, Associated Press began blaming
Haut for the press release, claiming rather absurdly that he had
seen the object, misidentified it, and issued the release on his
own initiative. It was never suggested in any press story that
Marcel had any hand in the release.

 >He also indicated to
 >Moore (you mention this below), that Haut had alrady leaked the
 >story to the press anuway.

That was the message put out by AP -- Haut was responsible, and
maybe Marcel thought 30 years later that that is how the story
leaked. In another interview later on, he said he had been
informed otherwise (perhaps by interviewers) and thought that
maybe something else had happened.

Your insinuation here is that Marcel leaked the story to Haut,
but Marcel's actual statement was one of extreme annoyance over
the story leaking out and reporters showing up at his house and
asking his wife questions.

Marcel, incidentally, received three commendations for Operation
Crossroads, the Bikini A-bomb tests the year before, all of them
mentioning his key role in setting up security for the project.
(The famous Admiral Blandy, who headed up the operation, issued
his commendation _after_ Roswell. Another commendation came from
Gen. Ramey, you know, _the_ Gen. Ramey.)  Does this sound like a
man who would leak a story to the base PIO for self-glory?

If this had happened, Marcel's ass would have been fried but
good.

 >>Cavitt, who was with Marcel and claims he realized it
 >>was a weather balloon all along, can't be bothered to ever tell
 >>Marcel this, or Blanchard either. This doesn't sound like an
 >>elite AF base charged with flying A-bombs -- it sounds like F
 >>Troop.

Point ignored by Bruce, but a very obvious and important point.

 >>The press release causes a press feeding frenzy that not only
 >>descended on Roswell, but Gen. Ramey and the Eighth AF in Fort
 >>Worth, and into the upper reaches of the Pentagon, including
 >>acting Chief of Staff Vandenberg. There were going to be some
 >>awfully angry generals demanding answers and some scalps for
 >>such a colossal and embarrassing foul-up.

 >Well - it sure did catch the generals by surprise,

Did it? Or did people like Gen. Ramey just feign surprise?
Actually, AP reported that Blanchard had communicated the find
to Ramey, as would be expected, and Ramey ordered the 'disk'
flown to Fort Worth _before_ the release. So Ramey knew about
the 'disk' all along.

Surely Blanchard would also inform his superior that he intended
to put out a press release, and again following the chain of
command, seek approval from Ramey for doing this.

 >when they
 >learned of the 'disk' from enquiring reporters.

None of this should have caught Ramey by surprise, and he
certainly did not learn of it from reporters.

 >They were
 >understandably curious. But it is evident that Marcel (and C/O
 >Blanchard) was not punished for his enthusiasm.

This is another important point you so blithely brush off as if
it were inconsequential.

 >>But absolutely nothing happened afterwards. There was no
 >>investigation. There were no reports written explaining what had
 >>happened.

 >Why would there be? Ramey had investigated and discovered the
 >simple misidentification. Press was notified, superiors got a
 >good chuckle, case closed. It was a mere blip on the screen for
 >military people.

This is utter nonsense and nothing but spin. I'm sure Gen.
Vandenberg, for one, would have been furious. The newspapers
described how the Pentagon was inundated with calls well into
the night. Vandenberg himself had to interrupt his busy schedule
to handle the situation, and newspapers reported him going to
the Pentagon AAF press room to take charge and place calls to
Roswell and Fort Worth.

Ramey should also have been mad as hell. His routine and his
command got thrown into turmoil as well. Having a monumental
public screw-up like that at one of his elite subcommands was
going to make him look bad, and people were going to be held to
account.

But with typical DebunkerLand magical thinking, the generals
were all jovial and nice guys. People could screw-up big-time
and even be insubordinate, and all was immediately forgiven.
There were no investigations, no reports written, and nobody got
called on the carpet.

Is this the same outfit that beat the Nazis 2 years before?

 >>Marcel got recommissioned and year later was still on
 >>the job as head of intelligence at Roswell. Both the SAC and the
 >>Pentagon wanted him for higher intelligence work. The SAC wrote
 >>the Pentagon they already had him in mind for a "key" position.
 >>The SAC briefly made him chief of some sort of foreign air
 >>intelligence division. This is a man who supposedly couldn't
 >>recognize rubber balloons, chewing gum wrapper material, Scotch
 >>tape, and wood used to make kid's kites.

Another important point brushed off.

 >>As this was happening, senior officers were writing reviews of
 >>Marcel. Blanchard's review the following spring and that summer
 >>were the best of Marcel's career to that point. He called him
 >>"highly dependable" and gave him superior ratings on his
 >>ability to reach logical decisions. Does this sound like
 >>somebody who couldn't identify a balloon as a balloon?

 >Forgive me if this is not exactly the terminology used, but:
 >Marcel was also ranked #3 out three command officers, and it was
 >noted that he sometimes tended to let his imagination get the
 >better of him - something to that effect. (I lost my copy of his
 >fitness report in last year's hard drive crash).

I will deal with the _actual_ statement and the _rest of the
evaluation_ below, because this is not what it says. The
statement and evaluation certainly do _not_ indicate that Marcel
"tended to let his imagination get the better of him." Again,
quite the opposite.

I posted Marcel's evaluations to the Net several years ago, but
the Web site is down, and I will be reposting them soon to my
own Website.

First point: Blanchard rated Marcel third out of four officers
of similar rank also rated by Blanchard. The criterion was
"future overall usefulness to the Army."

This doesn't tell us much unless you know who the other officers
were and what criteria Blanchard used to rate their "future
overall usefulness."

E.g., Marcel was a WWII draftee. Most other higher-ranking
officers at Roswell were career military officers and West Point
graduates. The West Point graduates will automatically get a leg
up in promotion over the draftees.

Second, this was the Air Force and Blanchard was a highly
decorated WWII bomber pilot. The Air Force automatically favors
the "fly-boys" over the non-pilots. Marcel lacked a pilot's
rating, so officers with pilot's ratings were going to be
favored over the non-rated officers. Ramey alluded to this a few
months later. He called Marcel command officer material, but
also indicated he wouldn't make general because he lacked a
pilot's rating. This didn't mean he thought less of him, just
that this was a fact of life in the Air Force. Fliers were
preferred over non-fliers.

Third, Roswell was considered an elite base, and everybody was
handpicked, including Marcel, because of their primary mission
(A-bomber base). Marcel faced unusually stiff competition. It is
my impression (though perhaps wrong) that an unusually high
proportion of Roswell career officers eventually reached the
upper ranks of command. (Perhaps someone like Kevin Randle or
Stan Friedman has some statistics on this.)

Blanchard, e.g., became a full general and was destined to be
the next AF Chief of Staff in 1967 before being cut down by a
heart attack just months before. Blanchard's successor at
Roswell was Col. John Ryan, who did become AF C/S after
Blanchard died. He also became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
(Ryan, incidentally, was another of those officers who didn't
think Marcel was a dufus. A year later, as Ryan was taking over
and Marcel was being transferred to Washington for higher
intelligence, Ryan wrote that Marcel's career had been "most
outstanding and most exemplary."

 >BTW - I was not a model soldier in my three year military career
 >- no actual crimes were committed, but I definitely was not a
 >candidate for a recruitment poster. But you sure would not have
 >known that from my fitness reports! Almost all "Outstanding".

So you are saying that if any officer is called "outstanding,"
this proves that they aren't really "outstanding" because nobody
caught on to your "shortcomings?"

On the other hand, according to you, Marcel's "shortcomings"
were fully exposed by the Roswell incident. He was "impulsive"
and let his imagination run away with him. And he was
insubordinate (allegedly got Haut to issue an important press
release without authorization from Blanchard or any higher-ups).

After observing this behavior in Marcel, what does Blanchard do?
He boosts his rating of Marcel in his next evaluation. He and
Dubose recommend him for promotion, and Dubose recommends him
for command officer training.

 >>Col. Dubose who indorsed Blanchard's first evaluation,
 >>recommended him for Air Command and Staff School. Both Blanchard
 >>and Dubose had earlier recommended his promotion to Lt. Col. in
 >>the AF Reserve.

 >I believe it is more correct that they endorsed Marcel's request
 >for the promotion in the AF Reserve.

Hair splitting from Bruce Hutchinson. Both wrote simply
"recommend approval" to Marcel's application. If he was really
the screw-up Hutchinson tries to portray, why would they
"endorse" or "recommend" promotion to the rank of Lt. Colonel?
That's the question he is evading. It doesn't fit his cartoon
portrait of Marcel.

Also notice how he dodges the point about Dubose recommending
Marcel for Air Command and Staff School in Marcel's next
evaluation. This is not something Marcel applied for. Why would
Dubose recommend a screw-up for command officer training?

This was followed four months later by Ramey's personal comments
that he thought Marcel command officer material based on the
"calibre and nature" of his "past performance and progress."

These guys seem to have forgotten that, according to Bruce
Hutchinson, Marcel, screwed up a simple balloon ID, was
"impulsive" (see below) and insubordinate, having gone outside
of channels and put up the base PIO to issuing an unauthorized
press release, disrupted the Pentagon right up to the top
responding to the press furor following the press release, and
after all that, all was forgiven, they recommend promotion,
command officer training, make him chief of an air intelligence
division, etc., etc. The military sure has a sense of humor.

 >>So all the officers who would have known whether Marcel had
 >>screwed up are instead praising him. Ramey's statements are
 >>especially telling here.

 >Marcel's 'screw up' was evidently not viewed as detrimental to
 >his career. But then, why should it?

Maybe because it would suggest he was a fool and also rashly
jumped to illogical conclusions, neither very good qualities for
an intelligence officer. But his evaluations say otherwise. See
below.

 >The Incident was
 >evidentially viewed as the efforts of a 'go-getum' officer
 >trying to solve the Flying Disk puzzle that had swept the nation
 >over the past two weeks. In any event, it is obvious that the
 >Incident had no lasting effect on the military. So why should
 >they punish anyone for the gaff?

Well for starters, according to you, he went outside of channels
and convinced Walter Haut to issue the press release without
authorization from higher up. That's not a simple screw-up;
that's insubordination and a court-martial offense.

Believe me, if any of this cartoonish portrayal of Marcel was
true, there would have been no endorsement for promotion, no
recommendations for command officer training, no upgrading of
his evaluations, no statements from Ramey a year later that he
was "outstanding," command officer material, and he had nobody
to replace him, etc., etc.

Even if they decided not to court-martial Marcel (and Haut) for
insubordination and keep things quiet, you can bet your tootsies
they would have removed him as head of intelligence at Roswell
and then quietly let him go when his commission ran out the
following spring.

 >>It should also be pointed out that Marcel wasn't alone in
 >>thinking the material was anomalous. E.g., Bill Brazel Jr.
 >>reported independently the exact same physical properties as
 >>Marcel for the debris fragments he found afterwards. Bill
 >>Rickett, one of the CIC men in Marcel's office, spoke of the
 >>thin metal material he was unable to bend. Gen. Arthur Exon said
 >>he was informed of the physical properties of the material while
 >>he was at Wright Field. Some of the descriptions matched those
 >>of Marcel. Obviously, they wouldn't be testing an aluminum foil
 >>radar target at the Wright Field labs.

 >>These were just a few of the witnesses to the anomalous debris.
 >>But like a typical Roswell debunker, you make it sound like this
 >>was only Marcel's story.

 >Nope - but the tales of the other Witnesses, particularly people
 >like Bill Brazel, Marcel Jr,, and Bessie are interesting because
 >the core of their stories describe debris that matches Mac
 >Brazel's descriptions, and the stuff on Gen Ramey's floor.

Only if you gloss over the actual details of what the totality
of witnesses described and ignore the obvious discrepancies
between the photos and these descriptions.

 >>>Brazel initially dismissed his find as junk.

 >>Says who?

 >Bessie.

Countered by Floyd and Loretta Proctor, actual adults at the
time, not a child, who said Brazel was totally mystified by what
he had found and already mentioning physical properties totally
inconsistent with a fragile radar target and balloon material.
He couldn't cut anything with a knife. Nothing would burn.
(Loretta Proctor has also stated Bessie wasn't at the ranch at
the time and got her story "all mixed up.")

Frank Joyce in Roswell also has long said he spoke to Brazel by
phone when Brazel first arrived in Roswell. Brazel, according to
Joyce, was in a highly emotional state, for one thing being
extremely upset over the huge quantity of debris that needed to
be cleaned up.

Marcel likewise indicated that he and Cavitt only collected a
fraction of it. In 1947, AP quoted Marcel as saying the debris
"was scattered over a square mile."

Then we get to Mack Brazel's interview. In it, he states that he
had already gathered everything up into only two small bundles
before going to Roswell. If that was the case, why didn't he
just bring those with him to Roswell when he reported it?
Instead, Roswell's two top intel officers have to go back with
him to collect it.

Now honestly, look at the photos and tell me if that isn't
something that he couldn't have gathered up in five minutes. Why
would Marcel describe it as being scattered over a square mile?

Then Brazel says that that was the last he heard of it until the
story broke. Have you ever asked yourself how he could have
heard about it in the middle of nowhere with no radio and no
phone? Did he have a satellite dish?

Then after hearing about it, the normally taciturn Brazel
_immediatedly_ jumps in his truck and heads into Roswell to set
the record straight (why would he do this?), arriving just in
time hours later for his interview that evening.

And all this, because he allegedly only found a few scraps of
"junk" shown in the Fort Worth photos.


End Part I

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                    Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:58 EST
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:48:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Rudiak


Part II:

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST

 >>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700

 >>Well UP quoted Wilcox as claiming Brazel thought it might be a
 >>"weather meter." But Brazel contradicted this statement by
 >>Wilcox in his interview later that evening. According to the
 >>Roswell Daily Record story, Brazel said that "'whispered kinda
 >>confidential like'" to Wilcox "that he might have found a flying
 >>disk." No "weather meter" here.

 >Of course not. Brazel was telling Wilcox about this stuff he had
 >found that might get him the rewards.

If he was so eager to collect that reward, why didn't he bring
those two small bundles with him to show what he had found? That
would have been the logical thing to do.

Furthermore, under Ramey's orders, Marcel told a story of
Brazel's find, which you will find detailed in numerous AP
stories. Brazel had first gathered up the material and thrown it
under some brush. Brazel first heard of the saucers in Corona on
Saturday night, and then immediately rushed back to "dig up" the
material first thing Sunday (I'm not making this up). According
to Brazel this was 8 miles from his ranch house, so some effort
would have been involved in retrieving this.

Then after "rushing back" to recover his find some distance from
his ranch house, what does Brazel do? Does he immediately go to
Roswell. No, he waits another day, according to the story. More
astoundingly, he fails to take those bundles with him to show
what he has found after rushing back and going out of his way to
get them.

How believable is this fable?

 >>More tellingly, at the very end of the interview, he
 >>categorically denied that it was a weather balloon. "Brazel said
 >>that he had previously found two weather observation balloons on
 >>the ranch, but that what he found this time did not in any way
 >>resemble either of these. 'I am sure that what I found was not
 >>any weather observation balloon.'"

 >And he was right.

No, all that was shown in Fort Worth was a single Rawin and a
single balloon, which was identified by weather officer Newton
as a standard Rawin weather observation balloon. Thus what was
shown _was_ an observation balloon.

 >>So if he never though it was any sort of weather balloon, why
 >>would he tell Wilcox he thought it might be a "weather meter"?
 >>And why would he instead, when interviewed, claim he had told
 >>Wilcox that he thought he had found a flying disk?

 >[fiction]

 >"Say Sheriff - I might have found what those folks in the papers
 >have been looking for - you know, a Flying Disk? Never seen
 >anything like this before,

Sorry, but a rubber balloon is a rubber balloon is a rubber
balloon. And why didn't he simply bring in the retrieved bundles
and show what he had found?

 >and it sure had been flying before it
 >crashed at the ranch. Kinda looks a little like a weather meter,
 >but you never know."

 >[end fiction]

 >>Immediately above, you claim Brazel thought it meteorological.
 >>Now your claiming he turned it in as a flying disk. Make up your
 >>mind.

 >See above.

Right, it truly is fiction. Makes no sense. Brazel _explicitly_
disavowed ever thinking it was a weather device in the Daily
Record article. Yet the Sheriff claimed Brazel came in saying he
thought it might be a "weather meter."

Sheriff Wilcox, when pushed for a more detailed description by
somebody from AP, declined to answer, saying he was "working
with those fellows at the base." AP reporter Jason Kellahin
likewise said Wilcox (whom he knew well) wouldn't discuss the
matter with him because the military had told him not to talk
about it. Wilcox's family tell us he was coerced. Anything
Wilcox was quoted as saying, such as Brazel claiming to have
found a "weather meter" should be treated with extreme caution,
since he was obviously not acting as an independent agent at
that point.

Why wouldn't Wilcox discuss anything further if this was just
"junk" and Brazel allegedly thought it might be a "weather
meter?"

<snip>

 >As I mentioned above, the most likely scenario has the Mogul
 >train drifting down with many of the balloons still intact. Once
 >the ballast and a Rawin or two was torn off, the remaining
 >balloons, and Rawin(s), ascended again and flew off. Brazel
 >certainly did not find a complete NYU train, just a portion of
 >it.

See my new thread, "Mogul shredded," for a detailed discussion
as to why this scenario is preposterous.

<snip>

 >I find it curious that Shandara, who was working to prove the
 >UFO hypothesis, gets such short shrift from you and Kevin. I
 >wonder what your opinions would be of his account if he had
 >published the exact opposite - without supporting tapes. But
 >here we have a fellow that is working hard to get a different
 >answer from Col DuBose, and got the "wrong" answer. It is to his
 >credit that he published his notes anyway, even if it was
 >detrimental to his case.

His and Moore's "cause" at the time was to prove that this was
the real Roswell debris. Lo and behold, Shandera claims Dubose
confirms in his interview that this was the real debris from
Roswell, in contradiction to every other interview Dubose ever
did. What a coincidence!

Furthermore, Dubose's alleged interview statements are not
presented as paraphrases or summaries from notes. They given as
a very lengthy and detailed transcript, as if it was taken from
a tape of the interview. But Shandera can't or won't produce a
tape, and likewise for any notes. Under the circumstances, one
is left with the distinct impression that the transcript and
Dubose's alleged statements were largely confabulated by
Shandera. Why else would he refuse to present the documentation?

 >And despite your research that shows the Southwest was lousy
 >with Rawins, nothing you have turned up indicates that Marcel
 >had knowledge of them. When he found the stuff, he was intrigued
 >and curious "he tried to make a kite".

Nothing you have turned up indicates he wasn't. Can you explain
to us how you know for a fact that Marcel didn't know about
radar targets or even ordinary rubber weather balloons? Is this
another of those amazing debunker psychic abilities where they
hold seances with he dead or use remote viewing to follow people
around in the past every moment of their lives to determine what
they did or did not know?

I have already pointed out that one of Marcel's MOS's was radar
intelligence officer and was probably familiar with the same
foil/paper material used to make radar chaff, as were many other
WWII AF personnel. Dubose, e.g., in Fort Worth, noted they the
similarity to foil radar chaff and also to devices they used on
life rafts to facilitate air-sea rescue work. Finding similar
foil paper even on an unfamiliar device might logically lead to
the conclusion that it was some sort of radar device.

The Rawins were also used at Operation Crossroads, where Marcel was primary
briefing officer. He might have been aware of them from there.

Besides this misses the major point. All anybody had to know was
that these were ordinary materials, recognizable to the average
5 year old: rubber balloons, Scotch tape, tinfoil, paper, and
balsa wood used to make kites. No average person, much less a
trained intelligence officer, would ever jump to the conclusion
that this was anything like the reported flying saucers flying
at supersonic speeds.

 >>Now how could all this be (including Kirton's overly early
 >>"final" identification and announcement of the special flight
 >>cancellation) unless the whole thing was a set-up from the
 >>beginning?

 >Press release hits papers - Ramey notified. Ramey talks to his
 >staff, and Blanchard (and/or Marcel, Cavitt, etc) via phone.
 >Descriptions are made, and a consensus is arrived at that it
 >looks like a wrecked radar target. Marcel and debris are ordered
 >to Ft Worth to confirm tentative identification, and to give
 >better credence to all future press releases.

 >While Ramey waits, phones are ringing off the hook. Ramey,
 >Kirton, and possibly others take a few of the calls and calm
 >some semi-hysterical reporters with the tentative
 >identification.

 >Sure the above is speculation, but it fits how intelligent men
 >would have handled such a situation, fits the available
 >evidence,

Nice try, but displays your usual disregard of details. There
would be no time for this _after_ the release hit the wires.
 From the moment the story became public to when Newton's
official ID went out was only three hours. Photos were being
taken within two hours, and Ramey was claiming the debris was
already in his office barely an hour later.

So unless the 8th AAF had one of those supersonic saucers at
their disposal all prepped and ready to go, your scenario is not
only impossible, it's ridiculous.

And if such a hypothetical discussion and identification had
been made _well before_ the release hit the wire (to provide the
necessary time for everything to have occurred), then you can
bet your tootsies, there would have been immediate calls to the
Roswell news outlets and the release pulled.

 >and is supported by later missives from Twining and
 >Schulgen, who knew that the U.S. did not have any crashed alien
 >ships.

Why would there be any mention of "crashed alien ships" in
documents classified at a lower level than "Top Secret"? Besides
Schulgen never brought this up in his "missives." This seems to
be another of your usual inventions of "facts."

 >>Furthermore, they didn't just call it a weather balloon. They
 >>specifically identified it as a radar target and also used the
 >>term Rawin device back in 1947. Newton did and so did Kirton
 >>earlier on.

 >The majority of the papers carried the 'official' weather
 >balloon story - no mention of targets. That was the "cover story"
 >that DuBose was referring to.

Absolutely false! Where do you get such notions? Virtually every
news story of July 9 carried the official radar target
identification by Newton often coupled with a repeat of the
identification by Ramey.

E.g., roughly two-thirds of the nation's newspapers carried one
of several AP versions of the event, with the following
identification by Newton: "Warrant Officer Irving Newton of
Medford, Wis., a forecaster at the base weather station, said
the object was a ray wind [sic] target used to determine the
direction and velocity of winds at high altitudes."

And the United Press story (add about another 20% of the
nation's newspapers) wrote: "Brigadier General Roger B. Ramey...
said... that he believed the object was the "remnant of a
weather balloon and a radar reflector," and was "nothing to be
excited about."

This was followed immediately by: "Later, Warrant Officer Irving
Newton... examined the object and said definitely that it was
nothing but a badly smashed target used to determine the
direction and velocity of high altitude winds."

 >>>>>That contradicts what Marcel initially told Moore and Pratt.
 >>>>>Jessies' first version was that the pictures of him were the
 >>>>>'real' stuff. It was only later that he changed his story.

 >>Marcel never said anything like this to Bob Pratt. The subject
 >>never came up in Pratt's interview. Where did you get this false
 >>tidbit?

 >An error on my part.

Apology accepted. But its also exactly like your gaffe about
Schulgen above or the papers not carrying a Rawin
identification. Also, unfortunately, errors like that about
Marcel are commonplace amongst debunkers. Then they get repeated
by other debunkers, all wanting to believe the worst possible
about Marcel. Nobody seems to do any independent investigation
or thinking. They just repeat what they hear from others,
whether there is any truth to it or not. A highly distorted
portrait of him then emerges. Below you will see Hutchinson,
e.g., misrepresent Marcel's service evaluation by Blanchard and
also label Marcel as "impulsive."

 >>>Well, Marcel - in person - repeated this initial statement in the
 >>>movie 'UFOs are Real'.
 >
 >>Well, if you can speculate, I can speculate too. Suppose=85.

 >Ummmm, so you are saying we have a 'confused' Marcel here?
 >Confused about what? And just how much of the story he told
 >Moore reflected this confusion?

No more than any other normal human being recalling something
from 30 years before. For a highly unusual and emotional event
(e.g. Sept. 11, Kennedy assassination, etc.), people generally
remember the overall event fairly accurately but have trouble
with some of the details. Typically times and orders of events
can get confused. Thus Marcel saying in "The Roswell Incident"
he arrived back at the base in the early evening and the press
release already having gone out.

Incidentally, recently I have been looking rather intensively at
the various Fort Worth photos. Based on the positions of the
chairs to the rear of the room and the position of some debris
displayed on the floor, Marcel's two known photos are clearly
most similar to the one of Irving Newton, who was photographed
last and by another photographer.

What this suggests to me is that the two photos of Marcel were
taken after, not before, the four of Ramey and Ramey/Dubose.

The point? Marcel recalled, according to Moore, being
photographed with the "real" debris, this then being removed and
replaced with the shill weather balloon and radar target. Marcel
then recalled Ramey and Dubose being photographed with the
balloon.

However, if the photos of Marcel with the balloon were actually
taken _after_ those of Ramey/Dubose, then _maybe_ my theory of
earlier, internal, nonpublic photos has some support.

30 years later, Marcel remembers only the earlier photos or
maybe compresses the two photo sessions into one (a typical
memory error, confusing two similar and closely-spaced events as
one).

As to whether Marcel could still confuse finding a balloon with
a flying saucer 30 years later -- no way. One also has to
explain in a _plausible_ way how the same "confusion" over
anomalous physical properties somehow extended to independent
witnesses. Case in point, Bill Brazel, interviewed at about the
same time by Moore, living a thousand miles away, never knowing
Marcel or meeting him, giving virtually identical physical
descriptions to the debris, the debris field, and the preceding
explosion that caused it. I find it virtually impossible to
explain such remarkable similarity of stories to confused memory
processes. Memory confusion should create radically different
stories, not essentially the same one.

 >>On the other hand, most of what Marcel recounted in his
 >>interviews tracked quite well with what can be determined from
 >>his military file, news articles of the day, and interviews with
 >>other witnesses. Marcel's story has a lot of corroborating
 >>evidence.

 >Most? Pilot? Air Ace with 5 kills? Degree from Georgetown?

Yes indeed most. Most of Marcel's so-called "lies" are flagrant
misrepresentations of Marcel's record and words, originally
started by Robert Todd, but continuing into the present,
including by you in your misrepresentation of his evaluation by
Blanchard.

As to the "pilot", "5 kills" and degree from Georgetown, all
this stems from one hasty, incompletely transcribed interview by
Bob Pratt, assumption of 100% accuracy in that existing
transcription (Ever done a transcription from tape? Words get
garbled and are difficult to interpret, inflections can get lost
in print, and inappropriate punctuation can get added, all of
which can alter the intended meaning), and finally debunker
propaganda spin.

I can't get into this in great detail, but very briefly:

"Pilot": Marcel _never_ claimed to be an Air Force pilot, only
an intelligence officer. His record confirms he flew on _combat_
bombing missions over a ten month period, coincident with the
two air medals he received and his bronze star. All he ever said
about this was that he "WAS" the bomb wing intelligence officer
(fact) and flew at times "AS" (not that he "was") a pilot on the
bombing missions (for non-rated personnel to occasionally fly
co-pilot is a lot more common than debunkers will acknowledge --
Eisenhower did it when stationed in the Philippines with
MacArthur, to cite but one example, and later earned a pilot's
rating).

"Air Ace with 5 kills:" Except for Pratt's interview, nobody can
recall Marcel ever making the claim that he received "five air
medals because I shot down five enemy aircraft in combat."
Marcel's son, e.g., remembers him claiming to have shot down
only one. Marcel's record shows two air medals, during his
combat bombing missions under fire (as stated in the wording of
the air medals), so his claim of taking over the waist gun from
a dead gunner and shooting down one Japanese plane is not out of
the question. Air medals can be issued for singular acts of
merit (though Robert Todd _falsely_ claimed they were issued
only for lengthy air service.) Kevin Randle has also pointed out
from personal experience that his record only shows him
receiving 2 air medals, though in reality he received many more
than this. Finally, virtually in the same breath as the air
medals, Marcel barely mentioned his bronze star, a higher award.
He certainly didn't inflate the reason for receiving it either,
such as taking out a machine gun nest. All he said was that he
got it for re-teaching green personnel direct from the States on
how to fly combat. Finally he mentioned only two of his three
commendations for Operation Crossroads and the "boasting" Marcel
somehow neglected to mention who he got them from, namely Gen.'s
Ramey and Kepner, and Admiral Blandy who headed the whole thing
up, was a very famous WWII Admiral and post-war commander of the
Pacific and Atlantic Fleets. You would think a "mythomaniac"
like Marcel trying to inflate his record would at least drop a
few names and invent a more heroic reason for getting the Bronze
Star, in conjunction with the alleged, one-time claim of
shooting down 5 Japanese planes. Conclusion: Who knows? Perhaps
it was a one-time boast, but given the lack of boasting by
Marcel about the rest of his medals, I think it more likely was
a Pratt transcription error. E.g., Marcel tended not to
elaborate and spoke in a clipped fashion, often leaving out
words. Perhaps what he really said was "I have five air
medals... shot down enemy aircraft in combat," and Pratt filled
in what he thought were the blanks and transcribed it as "I have
five air medals (because I) shot down (five) enemy aircraft in
combat." Karl Pflock did the same thing to the Pratt interview,
filling in blanks as to what he thought Marcel meant when he
dropped words (even filling in Pratt's incompletely transcribed
questions), the danger being this can unintentionally alter the
meaning.

"Degree from Georgetown:" This is the only interview where the
subject of Marcel's education came up. Pratt's transcript has an
unusual amount of garbling here, the original transcript
reading:

    ...degree in nuclear physics (bachelors) at completed work at
    GW Univ in Wash. attended (LSU, Houston, U of Wis, NY Univ,
    Ohio, docotr pool? and GW...)"

This doesn't even look like direct quoting anymore, but
something assembled from notes. It was obvious Pratt was having
difficulty understanding what was being said and it comes off as
ambiguous in part. Did Marcel say he got a degree from GWU or
just that he completed work there? Did he actually say he
physically "attended" the universities Pratt listed in
parentheses? Historically, Marcel was stationed in Washington
only a few blocks from GWU from 1949 to 1950 when he was with
the Special Weapons Project. From my own investigations, GWU
says they have no record of him attending classes or having a
degree. But on the other hand, his record lists him as an
"Assistant for Atomic Energy" during this period, according to
his job description was the primary briefing officer and
responsible for writing reports for upper brass on all changes
in intelligence, and needed to know some nuclear physics to do
his job, since the project's purpose was to determine if the
Soviets had a bomb, and this involved, among other things,
monitoring of isotopes from atmospheric fallout. I also found
out from one of the GWU professors there, that GWU nuclear
physicist George Gamow taught off-campus seminars and made
special arrangements for Washington-based military personnel to
take classwork off-campus, and a number earned degrees that way.
Gamow's nuclear physics class was also a night course (got that
from a course catalog), and Marcel could have walked over there
in 5 minutes after work, maybe just audited it to learn more to
do his job better. A possible connection between Gamow and
Marcel may also extend back to Operation Crossroads, which both
attended, where Marcel also served as primary intelligence
briefing officer for the operation (Ramey commented as to the
perfection of the briefings). His commendations noted his
compilation and dissemination of many complex intelligence
reports. This obviously doesn't prove Marcel's education claims,
but does show he was highly intelligent and no dummy, including
in matters pertaining to nuclear energy. Given just his service
background, he probably knew a lot more than the average AF
intelligence officer about it.

 >Final point - Maj. Marcel was not a stupid person. He was
 >reasonably intelligent, and a competent officer.

Typical backhanded compliment, but reasonably accurate. Indeed
he was not a stupid person. Most who knew him considered him
highly intelligent. Even Cavitt spontaneously mentioned this in
his A.F. interview. And here's a sample comment from his
evaluator when he was with the Special Weapons Project. He
wrote, "He is a very intelligent officer and has a very wide
range of capabilities. He has had experience in the intelligence
field in almost all its aspects from the lowest to the highest
limits. He has an excellent technical background [where did he
get it?], is a first class cartographer, draftsman, illustrator,
and presentation man."

 >He was also impulsive, and had a good imagination.

As seems to be your habit, you are just making this up. On the
contrary, his service evaluations indicate a very sober,
logical, and methodical person not given to being "impulsive."
To cite but a few examples: On Blanchard's evaluation of Marcel
the next spring, his personal comments describe Marcel as "A
quiet, mature field grade officer. Exceptionally well qualified
in his duty assignments," and "superior moral qualities." (And
on his next evaluation a few months later, Blanchard said Marcel
was "highly dependable", "serious minded", "very highly
qualified" and "highly recommended for intelligence work at
higher levels")

Under numerical ratings, he was rated "excellent" in being
"responsible in an emergency calling for initiative, coolness,
forceful leadership," and "plan all aspects of a military
situation, using judgment, initiative, and coolness."

He was also rated "excellent" in another section on the
characteristic "degree to which he is able to meet situations
without bias and without emotional upset." And he was rated
"superior" under "degree to which he is able to discriminate &
evaluate and arrive at logical conclusions." (Which presumably
would clearly apply to being able to determine that rubber,
balsa, tinfoil, etc., did not add up to an alien space ship.)

Under a checklist of personal characteristics, Blanchard listed
the following most descriptive of Marcel: "No one ever doubts
his ability," "Follows closely directions of higher echelons",
"cool under all circumstances", "businesslike", "has a quiet,
dignified bearing", "reserved", "a quiet, unassuming officer."

Under characteristics _least_ fitting Marcel, Blanchard marked
"hot-tempered", "loses his head, gets excited", "immature", and
"fails to use good judgment."

Can you tell me where this indicates Marcel was "impulsive"? Is
this another example of your debunker psychic abilities? On the
contrary, Blanchard paints a portrait of someone who was quiet,
mature, serious, businesslike, cool under pressure, logical,
stayed within military channels, highly qualified, highly
dependable, and had excellent judgment.

Again, please tell us how you determined Marcel was "impulsive"
and "had a good imagination?" Since you didn't personally know
the man, it is obviously based on nothing more than your
personal belief that he had to have misidentified a balloon and
target, therefore he had to have been impulsive with an
overactive imagination.

In other words, like a typical knee-jerk Marcel debunker, your
psychological portrait of him is based not on actual knowledge
or fact, but on your own personal impulsive conclusion and
imagination of what must have happened and what Marcel must have
been like.

 >He simply was taken up
 >with the press reports of all these Flying Disks, and then
 >suddenly the possessor of some strange debris that he did not
 >recognize. He thought he had solved the mystery, and proceeded
 >with that assumption.

No matter how you try to spin things, nothing about a rubber
balloon or balsa/tinfoil radar kite was "strange." All of it was
material kids would recognize. Also it doesn't exactly jibe with
Blanchard's actual superior rating of Marcel's ability to arrive
at logical conclusions, does it?

Now let's address the one slightly negative comment in
Blanchard's spring 1948 evaluation, since debunkers like Bruce
claim this demonstrates that Marcel "imagined" things. Blanchard
wrote, "his only known weakness is an inclination to magnify
problems he is confronted with."

To the debunkers, who with their remarkable psychic abilities
know all about Marcel, Blanchard is specifically referring to
the Roswell incident. But if that were the case, why does
Blanchard elsewhere in the evaluation note Marcel's maturity,
coolness, businesslike demeanor, logical conclusions, good
judgment, etc.? That is totally inconsistent with Marcel being
"impulsive" with an overactive imagination, being swept away by
flying saucer hysteria and "magnifying" "strange debris" like
rubber, balsa, paper, tinfoil, and Scotch tape into a "not of
this Earth" flying saucer.

If you want to get an accurate portrayal of what Blanchard
probably was describing, then you should place the comment in
the context of the _entire_ evaluation. Not only that, you
should look at other comments about Marcel's personality in
evaluations from others preceding and following this. Otherwise
you are guilty of being exactly what you accuse Marcel of being,
namely impulsive in your judgment and letting your over-active
imagination of what you think Marcel must be like to impose a
narrow-minded interpretation of this one very brief comment from
Blanchard. It's your equivalent (and those of other debunkers
taking the same dishonest tact) of finding a balloon and
inflating it into a flying saucer.

What I think Blanchard meant, based on other of Marcel's
evaluations, was Marcel paying too much attention to petty
details and trying to get things perfect. Marcel, in fact, got
dissed on this very characteristic in a previous evaluation just
before the Roswell incident (June 30, 1947) by Deputy Base
Commander Jennings. Jennings wrote, "A loyal, extremely diligent
officer, rather lacking in imagination and initiative. He is
definitely a 'plugger' and makes harder work of all his
assignments than is necessary."

Marcel was obviously not Jennings kind of officer and these are
far and away the most negative comments in Marcel's file.
Interestingly, I know a local TV correspondent, a former Air
Force OSI officer incidentally, just lift the one section
"rather lacking in imagination in initiative," plaster it on the
TV screen in a debunking series on Roswell, again totally devoid
of context of the rest of Marcel's evaluations, and just let it
hang there. The obvious insinuation was Marcel created the
Roswell incident to prove that he wasn't unimaginative and
lacking in initiative.

Of course, if that's what had really happened, they would have
hung Marcel by his you-know-whats, but let's not go there.

(That's what's great about armchair psychobabble evaluations of
other people. You can twist and mold them into any grotesque
caricature of a person you want, just like some crooked DA
trying to railroad somebody into prison.)

You see statements about Marcel's diligence, extreme hard work,
high work standards, and perfectionist tendencies all through
his career. Generally it was rated as a positive. E.g., Gen.
Ramey spoke of the "perfection" of Marcel's staff briefings
during Operation Crossroads in his commendation to Marcel. But
not everybody saw it that way, at least not all the time.

Based on Blanchard's follow-up comments in another evaluation a
few months later, Blanchard thought Marcel's hard work and high
standards that he set for himself and those under him was
generally a plus. But apparently Blanchard also thought Marcel
overdid it at times and didn't know when enough was enough.
Hence I think the earlier statement about "an inclination to
magnify problems," just like Jennings had noted still earlier
about "making harder work of his assignments than necessary."

If this was indeed Marcel's "only known weakness", then we
should all be so perfect.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                     Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Kelly

From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:23:47 +1100
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:54:36 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Kelly


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 9:24 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: SDI - Tonight's Line-up


 >Readers might like to take a look at the 'Strange Days...Indeed'
 >line-up for tonight:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

 >ebk


Thx to Errol for posting this reminder. It was a good show,
really glad I didn't miss it. There was even some strange things
what went on with the phones, very strange things, indeed.

Stan Friedman's interview was also good, he has as with others
really started to bring down the 'curtain of laughter' that has
dogged UFO researchers for so many years. Even my Father no
longer calls me a nut case after having watched many of the
Videos out now by Mr Friedman and others. My congratulations to
these pioneers of UFO research it sure hasn't be easy for them
over the years and I bet on more than one occasion they felt
like throwing the whole thing in and doing something else with
much less ridicule. I for one am glad they didn't chuck it in.

The subject of Mothman was also very interesting, there is a
similar being[?] - for want of a better word - mentioned by
Australia's indigenous people but I'm not totally sure of the
title given to this being so I will reframe of naming it until
I'm sure what they call it.

Chris (tophar)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

             Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 03:23:28 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:57:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Lehmberg


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:47:01 EST
 >Subject: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Request For Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols

 >Dear List, Errol,

 >The project previously listed and discussed is at the very
 >beginning stages. I am therefore asking all of you to please
 >read this entire post, and lend us a helping hand.

 >First, a little background. This is a beginning, and I am  not a
 >researcher except of my own experiences. I am depending on the
 >experts at our medical group to define the study. They too, are
 >not researchers of this phenomena.

 >There is however, another important issue here, about which I
 >was not aware, and was not told by my internist recently.

 >This is a large medical group. So large and so popular (because
 >of the caliber of physicians) that they have an arrangement with
 >one of the best hospitals hereabouts. The arrangement is
 >complete affiliation. The hospital has all the latest equipment
 >and is just below the level of the Westchester County Medical
 >Center, in case anyone is interested. That's a pretty high level
 >folks. We do not have a helipad, though... chame, chame, chame!

 >As a result of the group's size and success at treatment, most
 >of the patients are long term; my internist has been trying to
 >make me healthy for 35 years. It's a job. He's literally saved
 >my wife's life on two occasions. With such long term patients
 >being attended by their internists for so long, a great deal of
 >personal data is transferred to the internist. Some of it _very_
 >personal, and which would not ordinarily be discussed with 'just
 >a doctor.'

 >He called to tell me that there are many like me, who've
 >confided in their internists or other doctors at the group. As a
 >result, their interest in this conundrum was boosted up a few
 >notches. I suppose that I threw them over the fence. And as a
 >further result, the number of perceived abductees is larger than
 >I dreamed. The fact is that no further volunteers are needed.
 >And even with those few who wished to take part in the project,
 >are not needed but will be used. There will be no
 >'non-abductees' in this project, except those whom the group
 >selects. And these will have the same or similar 'complaints' as
 >the abductees, but with no history of abduction, sightings of
 >UFOs and etc.

 >Last, and most important, we seek the assistance, by way of
 >suggestions from you, the much maligned researchers, as to any
 >ideas you may have which may assist in making this project
 >satisfactory to as many as possible. We even look for protocols
 >which might be useful. Anything. _Anything!_ And this request is
 >from the group. I have set up a special email address for such
 >responses, or simply use UpDates, that is, if the information is
 >of interest to all. You decide.

 >By the way, it was not me who maligned researchers, it was
 >Gesundt. And he was in his cups.

 >Please help us... on or off-List... doesn't matter. But we need
 >your help. Those who write off-List will receive my private
 >telephone number, at my discretion, if it becomes necessary to
 >speak by landline. Or, I will call you. But for crimey sake,
 >don't just sit there like lumps on a log, help us out.

 >The worst thing which could happen is for some of you to bitch
 >and moan that the project was not 'done right'. Well, now you
 >have the opportunity to contribute to the study and make sure
 >it's as right as it can be.

 >I am disappointed that the only response was prematurely
 >ejaculated and that not one of you said squat. Now for my
 >petulant and childish comment:

 >If this project is so uninteresting, or for any other reasons,
 >not something which is exciting to this List, then I shall not
 >post anything about it here. Not out of spite, but out of a
 >complete and total frustration with you guys. And then, watch
 >out, because out comes Gesundt in all his drunken fury. I am
 >serious about the first comment. Take part or do as you've done
 >thus far, keep quite. Is it fear or disinterest? Or is it that
 >you agree with the comments made thus far? Your response, or
 >lack of it, will help me decide a very great deal. A very great
 >deal. Don't disappoint us or you. Do something.


An interested lurker asked me to pass this along, Jimbo... seems
like good stuff to me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The first order of business would be to make the proposed study
as "bullet-proof" as possible on the front end. (Before it
begins)

a. You need to establish the credentials and objectivity of the
people that are to conduct the study. It means getting the
doctors and the institution to allow their names and credentials
to be published and checked out by independent researchers.

b. Criteria for the selection of 'subjects' needs to be
established and agreed upon by those conducting the study. That
means the development of a 'diagnostic tool' that is to be
applied uniformly on all prospective subjects/applicants.

c. Once the research personel and the subjects have been
selected, legal contracts and releases need to be signed by all
concerned. This is necessary in order to protect both the
researchers and the subjects.

d. A clearly stated objective needs to be formulated and a
practical methodology appropriate to the study's objective need
to be agreed upon.

e. Any results obtained should be published in a peer review
journal or 'White Paper' so that the findings can be studied and
confirmed (or denied) by independent experts. The study should
bear the name of institution and the (in this case doctors)
researchers who conducted it.

If the 'doctors' are not willing to publish under their own
names then the whole study is nullified and a 'moot pooty.'

An opinion: the "abductee" should not have any say-so in regard
to the choosing of either; the objective of the study, the
researchers, the subjects or the methodology. Any such
involvement by someone who has a vested (real or perceived)
special interest in the results, would taint, if not invalidate,
the effort before it begins.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

~~=D6~~
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 27

                 Cydonian Imperative: 01-27-02 Cliff & Face

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 01:29:38 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:58:51 -0500
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: 01-27-02 Cliff & Face


The Cydonian Imperative
01-27-02

Compelling Similarities Between the Cliff and the Face

by Mac Tonnies

See: http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html


[image]

The Cydonia region, showing "City," "Face" and "Cliff"
in context.

The enigmatic formation known as the "Cliff" exhibits
similarities to the better-known Face, located directly to the
west. In the image below, the upper section of the Cliff mesa is
shown, revealing a feature not unlike the "headdress" noted on
the Face. Perhaps more interestingly, there are two lines joined
at precisely ninety-degrees (left of image), recalling the right
angles that define the Face's framing mesa. Also visible is a
descending trench not unlike the columnated crevasse located on
the Face's upper eastern half. This feature intersects an
unusual elliptical formation.


[image]

The upper portion of the Cliff reveals a gross resemblance to
the Face's framing mesa. Note conspicuous right angle and other
possible structural elements.


[image]

This columnated trench found on the Face's "headdress" recalls a
similar formation atop the Cliff. Shape-from-shading image
courtesy Chris Joseph.


[image]

This bright triangular feature is located on the west side of
the Cliff mesa's vertical axis.

As described elsewhere on this site, the Cliff is exceptionally
hard to explain in geological terms. Consisting of a narrow mesa
and a ruler-straight upper defile paralleling the mesa's
vertical axis, the Cliff is situated next to the rim of a
"splash"-style impact crater. If the Cliff existed prior to the
impact, the blast of mud would have destroyed it. But
remarkably, the upper defile is perhaps one of the most
well-preserved features in the Cydonia region. (Close inspection
shows that the defile is composed of regular segments, giving it
a distinctly structural appearance. See image below.)


[image]

The remarkably straight, apparently segmented defile on top of
the Cliff mesa appears to be composed of two planes joined in a
triangle. The west-facing plane is noticeably wider than its
eastern counterpart.

The Cliff is a large formation, spanning nearly twice the length
of the Face. It seems far-fetched to assume that it was built
without purpose. And given its matching orientation and
proximity to the Face, it's not unreasonable to assume a
specific architectural connection between the two features. In
"The Monuments of Mars," Richard Hoagland suggests that the
Cliff was built as an "artificial horizon," from which
inhabitants of the "City" could observe stellar alignments
unimpeded by the rim of the "splash" crater. Given that the
Cliff could not have formed after the impact, the Cliff's
location and morphology are compelling evidence that the Cliff
was deliberately assembled after the nearby impact.


[image]

The Cliff as seen by Viking.

Unfortunately, data loss from the Mars Global Surveyor orbiter
eclipsed a substantial portion of the Cliff. Viking imagery
indicates there may be an additional structural anomaly below
the central elevated defile. If so, perhaps future
high-resolution images will assist in addressing this most
unusual feature. Until then, I personally hope the Cliff will be
targeted by the Mars Odyssey's Gamma Ray Spectrometer (see
article above); if the defile is artificial, its apparent state
of preservation argues that it might be composed of materials
other than mere rock.

-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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                        PRG Update - January 27, 2002

From: Stephen Bassett <ParadigmRG@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 11:54:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:41:42 -0500
Subject: PRG Update - January 27, 2002


PRG
Paradigm Research Group

Update - January 27, 2002
(Washington, DC metro area item at the bottom)

Sufficient time has passed to assess the domestic, political
reality of post-911 America. It is time to resume the pursuit of
an end to the government embargo of the truth of an ongoing
extraterrestrial presence. More on this in an upcoming X-PPAC
update.

Paradigm Clock Reset

On January 16, 2002 PRG reset the Paradigm Clock back one minute
to 11:58:00 based primarily on events on and after September 11,
2001.

The explanations for resetting the clock can be viewed at:
www.paradigmclock.com/timechangechronicle.html

The complete press release can be seen at:

www.paradigmclock.com/Press_Releases/Press_releases.html#1-16-02

EXTRA Award

On January 21, 2002 PRG awarded an EXTRA in the research
category to The Black Vault [www.theblackvault.com], in order to
recognize the extraordinary work and website of John Greenewald,
Jr. The EXTRA is accompanied by a $1000 grant.

View the EXTRA at: www.paradigmclock.com/extraportal.html

The complete press release can be seen at:

www.paradigmclock.com/Press_Releases/Press_releases.html#1-21-02


'Out There'

Dan Aykroyd's company, Beyond Belief Productions, has ceased
production of 'Out There', a half-hour, daily interview program
on the paranormal for the SciFi Channel. This was announced one
month after the acquisition by Vivendi Universal of
entertainment properties of USA Networks, which included the
SciFi Channel. About two dozen programs had been completed by
that time. For information on the acquisition, please see:
http://www.vivendiuniversal.com/vu2/en/news/00000850.cfm

PRG founder, Stephen Bassett, was the first interview taped for
"Out There." The focus of the program was the politics of UFOs/
Disclosure. Mr. Aykroyd, one of the most creatively funny men in
movies and television, was quite serious about the subject. He
and his wife, Donna Dixon Aykroyd, have both had two strong
sightings - one in a Concord at 50,000 feet.

On camera Mr. Aykroyd stated that his wife, an American citizen,
would donate $1000 to X-PPAC. He then signed the 2002 Open
Congressional Hearing Petition, as did many of his staff.

The SicFi Channel has indicated it is considering another format
utilizing Mr. Aykroyd's talents. Nevertheless, the concept of a
serious interview program on the paranormal is overdue to turn
up on a major cable network. It is only a matter of time.

PRG Links Section

PRG has just completed a review of over 500 UFO/ET research/
activist websites. There is a design revolution underway with the
introduction of Flash to UFO/ET sites (they were meant for each
other) and the quality continues to improve. The Paradigm Clock
now has the largest links section to front pages of sites in this
genre on the internet. Go to: www.paradigmclock.com/links.html

Enterprise Mission / RKO Movie

Richard Hoagland and Paul Davids have completed a deal with RKO
Pictures to make a feature film on the Mars/NASA controversy.
They will have complete creative control and Paul Davies will
direct. PRG is aware of other movie deals in the development
stages which address UFO/ET phenomena in a manner which takes
into account the research and findings which the government
chooses to ignore. This is another indication that entertainment
executives are becoming aware of more than just the public's
interest in UFO/ET phenomena.

CAUS Website

Peter Gersten has announced the Citizens Agains UFO Secrecy
(CAUS), Paranormal News Network (P3N) and the Formal Action
Committee for Extraterrestrial Studies (FACETS) websites will
close down on January 31, 2002. Key materials from these sites
will be archived at a new site about to be launched by another
group - the Paranormal and UFO Information Network at:
www.pufoin.org

This contraction is happening for essentially one reason: lack
of money. PRG continues to be confounded by the failure
(refusal) of wealthy Americans to support the political efforts
to end the UFO cover-up at a level worthy of the implications of
the issue. What modest contributions which have occurred went to
the "science" of the phenomena. (Even worse, internet mogul Paul
Allen recently gave $12 million to SETI!!) The political impasse
which not only stifles truly comprehensive scientific inquiry
and continues to damage the credibility of the America
government goes without. This abdication of political power as
regards the most important pending political/social/economic
transition in human history lies somewhere between tragic and
bizarre. If those Americans with both the disposition and
financial wherewithal to effectuate political change, knew how
little funding it would take to end the UFO/ET truth embargo,
they would be shocked. Where is the courage, where is the
understanding and what will it take to open their eyes?

Hickman Report

Jim Hickman has been appointed Research Specialist for MUFON
Media Operations and is working to complete his second book,
"The Alien Menace,"

Upcoming UFO/ET Conferences

The upcoming conference section of the Paradigm Clock has been
loaded up. Go to: www.paradigmclock.com/conferences.html

If you have an upcoming conference you would like listed, please
contact PRG ASAP.

11th Annual UFO Congress - Laughlin, NV - March 3-9

Stephen Bassett will be attending the 11th Annual UFO Congress
in Laughlin, Nevada and welcomes the opportunity to meet there
with colleagues and friends to discuss the continuance of the
disclosure process in 2002.

First Friday Seminar Series
Frederick, MD Speaking Engagement - February 1, 2001

PRG/X-PPAC supporters and interested parties in the Washington,
DC metro area are welcome to attend a lecture by Stephen Bassett
on February 1, 8 p.m. at the Unity Church in Frederick, MD, One
West Ninth Street, Frederick MD 21701.

Topic: Politics of Disclosure: the human race at the crossroads.

For information contact Carole Kirby (301) 496-7056 For
directions:
http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=1+W+9TH+
ST&csz=FREDERICK+MD+21701&Get%A0Map=Get+Map

  ___________________________________________________

        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
  ___________________________________________________

    "There is almost no limit to what you can accomplish,
      if you are willing to give away the credit."
  ___________________________________________________

       "Intellectual passion is found at the
       intersection of fact and implication."






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 12:52:34 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:43:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark


 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology


 >>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:44:46 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >>>Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:25:16 -0600

 >>>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 14:35:10 CST
 >>>>Subject: Subject: Re: Quote From John Keel About 'Current' Ufology


 >But how about this for purple prose - can you guess who wrote
 >it?

 >"...John A. Keel, a veteran critic of ETH whose work we have
 >long admired... Keel has probably spent more time in the field
 >than any other private researcher. This fact has afforded him
 >the opportunity to view the UFO mystery from the inside, and not
 >from the distorted perspective of most UFO literature, written
 >usually to enhance belief in interplanetary visitors, which
 >blithely ignores the evidence inconsiderate enough not to fit
 >the author's preconceptions."

Without checking, I'd say this looks like something I could have
written, and probably did write, 25 to 35 years ago (otherwise,
why would you be citing it?). I can go you one better: Loren
Coleman and I actually dedicated our book Creatures of the Outer
Edge (written in 1975, published in 1978) to Keel. As I have
never made a secret (see, most recently, my article in the next
issue of Fortean Times), I once thought John was a cool guy with
great ideas. Eventually, of course, as my intellect and
understanding evolved, I changed my mind.

Speaking of which, John, when was the last time _you_ changed
your mind about anything ufological in the past 25 to 35 years?
As far as I can tell, your psychosocial obsession has been
locked in concrete for as long as I can remember.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                           THE WATCHDOG - 01-27-02

From: THE WATCHDOG - Royce J Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 11:32:56 -0800
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:57:41 -0500
Subject: THE WATCHDOG - 01-27-02


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

***NEWS***

~ New Hampshire UFO Sightings Continue
~ Something In The Air
~ Mothman Sightings Will Continue
~ Life, As It Was In The Beginning?
~ Who Is The Mothman Expert?
~ Dropa Stone UFO Taped...A Star or a UFO?


***OF INTEREST***

~ A Look At the So-Called Prophecy Research Institute: Claiming
to be a non-profit religious institute, Sean David Morton's
'institute' appears to be nothing more than his apartment.

http://www.ufowatchdog.com/pri.html


***SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT***

Thanks to the every changing policies and software utilized and
implemented by Internet Service Providers, The Watchdog
e-updates will no longer be making visits to your e-boxes.
Several problems with sending messages to a very large list and
numerous other problems with SPAM filters have put a halt to the
list - for now. I am hoping to start the list back up again
some time in the future, but for now UFOWATCHDOG.COM readers
will have to check the site for continued updates and news
stories. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

The updates will continue to be sent to UFO e-lists.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                             UFO Photos Pre 1947

From: Matt Hurley <m.hurley@ntlworld.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:55:04 -0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:59:30 -0500
Subject: UFO Photos Pre 1947


Dear List,

I am now collating photos of UFOs pre 1947.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.hurley/photos.html

If you have any images to add or information on the examples
already shown, please email me.

Thanks

Matt
Historical Artwork and UFOs








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:24:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:02:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Maccabee


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:08:18 -0600

 >Listfolk,

 >Helene and I saw The Mothman Prophecies movie last night and
 >loved it. There are very few great Fortean films, but this is
 >surely one of them. It's got everything - genuine creepiness, a
 >thrilling, suspenseful storyline, intelligence, and all sorts of
 >elements ufologists and Forteans will recognize. Director Mark
 >Pellington is to be commended for resisting the temptation to
 >turn John Keel's book into yet another dopey creature or
 >science-fiction movie.


I didn't love it. It was OK. I thought they overused "hackneyed"
visual effects.

In the first half of the movie, at least, in an attempt to
manufacture creepiness when there was really nothing that
creepy. Also, I thought the movie started very slowly. Got
interesting in the last 1/3 or so. The ending scenes were the
most dramatic.

But my teenage children thought it was good.

I'll be surprised if it gets as much interest as Beautiful Mind
or Black Hawk Down, 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                     Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hebert

From: Amy Hebert <yellowrose129@attbi.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 16:08:46 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:05:18 -0500
Subject: Re: 'Bonafide' Abductees? - Hebert


 >From: Michelle Guerin <NYMush@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:34:09 EST
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: 'Bonafide' Abductees?


 >Whom and what determines if an abductee is 'bonafide'? I'm not
 >trying to be confrontational since I consider myself a cog in
 >that wheel.

Hi, Michelle:

When I did abduction research, I use to ask that question
myself. It reached a point where I decided I, as a researcher,
had to have more than just the word of the individual to base my
studies on.

As a counselor, it was not important to verify an individual's
claims of abduction but as a researcher, it became extremely
important. If you are just going to collect stories and offer
support to someone who claims to have been abducted, it would be
nice to try and verify the individual's claims but obviously not
always possible. If you are going to do scientific research
about abductions, verification takes priority over the
psychological needs for support and understanding on the part of
the claimed abductee. Counseling and research are two different
functions and may be difficult, if not impoossible, to conduct
concurrently.

There is really no other way to conduct scientific research
involving claims of abduction and hope to achieve valid
statistics, data, etc. Without at least some attempt to seek
evidence to support the claims of an individual, all you have
are... the claims of the individual.

I am not trying to devalue claims of abduction. I am indicating
the difference between investigation based mainly on interviews,
hypnosis sessions, etc. and more precise, scientific
investigation and research.

Unfortunately, most people assume that because abductions are
perpetrated by "aliens" and evidence, thus far, has been
difficult to obtain, investigations are limited only to
hypnosis, interviews and questioning to gather information.
Since information of this nature is largely all we have managed
to obtain to date, the assumption is that this is the best we
can do.

We must do more and require more if researchers hope to gather
valid data concerning abduction phenomena. Taking a more
objective approach might be the first step toward research and
reliable results. Investigations need to be conducted by
researchers seeking only to find information and evidence to
study rather than seeking information for a book, prove a theory
or prove "aliens" and UFO's exist. The objectives need to remain
focused on gathering evidence and studying that evidence without
bias.

Before we can claim to know who is being abducted, by whom, for
whatever reasons, we must first conduct studies to establish the
existence of abduction phenomena and what it is and is not -
isolate the variables. Abduction phenomen may be another
phenomenon or part of a larger phenomenon being misidentified.

Once objective research has established a more precise
definition of what constitutes an abduction, uniform studies
conducted by qualified, objective researchers according to
specific scientific protocol need to be initiated through a
world wide project independent of any government or authorities
with vested interests in the research results.

Until objective, scientific studies are conducted by qualified
professionals around the world according to specific guidelines
without bias, we may never really know what is or is not a
"bonafide" abductee.


A. Hebert







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                 Point Pleasant Area Crashes Leave Five Dead

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 18:56:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:09:50 -0500
Subject: Point Pleasant Area Crashes Leave Five Dead


Source: Sunday News Gazette - Charleston, West Virginia

http://sundaygazettemail.com/news/Other+News/2002012741/

Sunday January 27, 2002

Mason accidents leave five dead

Two auto accidents resulted in five deaths in Mason County on
Saturday.

The first accident happened around 7:05 a.m. when two vehicles
collided on W.Va. 2 south of Henderson.

The drivers, Michael Lee Wilson, 23, of Point Pleasant, and Dana
W. Chapman, 51, of Southside, were killed.

The second wreck occurred at 1:22 p.m. on U.S. 35 about one mile
inside the Mason County line from Putnam County. In the second
crash, three people from one vehicle were killed and five in two
other vehicles were injured.

Angel Halley, 28, of Columbus, Ohio, was driving her vehicle
with her two children, Kaitlyn and Jason. All three of them were
killed, according to Mason County Deputy J.M. Finnicum.

Brian McDowell of Christiansburg, Ohio, was driving a truck;
Chad Webb was riding with McDowell.

Billie Wilson of St. Albans was the driver of the third vehicle.
Nick Smith and Alice Terry were in the Wilson vehicle. The
conditions of the accident victims were not available Saturday
evening.

Deputy Finnicum said he is still investigating the cause of the
second accident.

Jeremy Bryant, chief of the Point Pleasant Volunteer Fire
Department, responded to both emergencies.

"We extricated people in both accidents," he said.

The large number of fatalities in one day is unusual for a rural
county such as Mason.

"And to beat it all, today is my birthday," Bryant said. "I'll
never forget it."

The Mason County Sheriff's Department is investigating.

---

http://www.lorencoleman.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:13:06 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates
 >Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:31:50 -0400

<snip>

 >I completely agree that David's analysis is right on and very
 >well done. However, I must again reiterate other facts that make
 >it totally incorrect to suggest that this one balloon was what
 >Brazel found, and was observed in situ by Marcel and Cavitt, and
 >had something to do with the Mogul Program.

 >A. Many Evening Newspapers on July 8, 1947 (from Chicago West)
 >noted that the material was found by Brazel "sometime last
 >week". That alone rules out Mogul Balloon wreckage since, as has
 >been noted,it would have been very badly deteriorated if it had
 >been out there since mid June.


Stan,

How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
something?

But let's say its now lain outside from mid-June to the
beginning of July. Do you know what the specific weather
conditions were then, whether they consisted of days of full
sunshine, partly cloudy skies, or contiguous days of overcast
skies? I submit that you don't.

Do you know if it rained on this day or that and wetted the
material, which might have resisted its deterioration? No, you
don't.

If you are as familiar with weather in the desert Southwest as
you pretend to be, then you know full well that a recorded
thunderstorm in, say, Roswell, says absolutely nothing about the
meteorological conditions five or ten miles away, never mind as
far away as the Foster ranch. Ditto reports of clear, sunny
skies in Roswell.

The fact of the matter is that you don't know what the local
weather was like during the period involved and so can't make
the above argument. At least not as confidently and assertively
as you do.

In addition, you would need to assess the deterioration exposure
factor, to coin a phrase, of the balloon material in the
pictures taken in Ramey's office and tell us how many days of
exposure or deterioration you think it represents.

Next, maybe you and Rudiak could tell us what degree of
deteriorated balloon material Ramey ordered up in order to
substitute for the real debris. Did he order up a balloon
deteriorated three, five, seven, or 14 days, and under what
specific conditions?

Wouldn't he just have ordered anything available? But, if so,
why would it have been a deteriorated balloon and a wrecked
rawin? Why couldn't he have shown the press relatively new,
intact ones? The press wouldn't have been any wiser.

Or maybe you're suggesting that Lawton, Roswell, and other bases
routinely kept on hand weathered balloons and wrecked rawins.
Why? Because general Ramey might one day need them for a press
conference and photo op?

Who would have this stuff lying around? No one, because there
would have been absolutely no reason to have it lying around.
Who would save a wrecked rawin target, made of balsa wood and
tin foil for any length of time? Do you think bases kept a
stockpile of this stuff?

The stuff pictured in Ramey's office is just what it pretends to
be: What Marcel picked up outside Roswell and accompanied to
Carswell.

<snip>


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                  Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:45:07 EST
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:14:49 -0500
Subject: Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Mortellaro


 >From: Christopher Kelly <tophar@iprimus.com.au>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: SDI - Tonight's Line-up - Kelly
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:23:47 +1100

 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers -
 >Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 9:24 AM
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: SDI - Tonight's Line-up


 >>Readers might like to take a look at the 'Strange Days...Indeed'
 >>line-up for tonight:

 >>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/

 >>ebk

 >Thx to Errol for posting this reminder. It was a good show,
 >really glad I didn't miss it. There was even some strange things
 >what went on with the phones, very strange things, indeed.

 >Stan Friedman's interview was also good, he has as with others
 >really started to bring down the 'curtain of laughter' that has
 >dogged UFO researchers for so many years. Even my Father no
 >longer calls me a nut case after having watched many of the
 >Videos out now by Mr Friedman and others. My congratulations to
 >these pioneers of UFO research it sure hasn't be easy for them
 >over the years and I bet on more than one occasion they felt
 >like throwing the whole thing in and doing something else with
 >much less ridicule. I for one am glad they didn't chuck it in.

 >The subject of Mothman was also very interesting, there is a
 >similar being[?] - for want of a better word - mentioned by
 >Australia's indigenous people but I'm not totally sure of the
 >title given to this being so I will reframe of naming it until
 >I'm sure what they call it.

 >Chris (tophar)

Dear Chris (Tophar), List and Errol ...

I concur. This may be one of the best shows... at least from my
enjoyment standpoint. In spite of the Gremlins in the phone
system. Maybe because of them..

And for those who could not abide them, the hell with 'em if
they can't take a joke.

Love,

Jim








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 21:36:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:19:26 -0500
Subject: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman


9 UFOs Taped By Chilean Channel 13 Cameraman

Sunday January 27, 2002

Felipe Martinez was taping on assignment in Lota, Region VIII
of Chile when nine UFOs show up flying in formation at high
speed from south to north. The professional said he can not
affirm that it was extraterrestrial but he never had shot
something so fast and strange before.

Channel 13 checked for airplanes, balloons or meteor shower with
negative results.

Note: Chile is having a full scale UFO flap, strange creatures,
birds and Chupacabras reports since march 18, 2000.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

              Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 20:52:37 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:22:59 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Stacy


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:43 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >The ballast should have been cut loose on descent and dropped
 >many miles away, according to Mogul engineering diagrams. The
 >Air Force and Charles Moore of Mogul tried to ascribe the "black
 >box" to the black radiosonde battery packs. One trouble with
 >this is Marcel, the old radio ham, would certainly have
 >recognized it as such from the wires emerging from the pack or
 >electrical contacts on the surface of any battery pack. See
 >"Mogul shredded."

David,

Apart from the fact that the Hutchinson scenario might not have
been the way things actually unfolded, how did you acquire your
own psychic powers to the extent that you can assert with
certainty what Marcel would or wouldn't have recognized, and
under what circumstances?

 >Amazing how you blithely dismiss this point with the wave of
 >your hand as "immaterial." Even if Marcel knew nothing of radar
 >targets, he could have reasoned by analogy with what he did
 >know. The obvious similarity between the material used to make
 >radar chaff (paper/foil) and radar targets (paper/foil) could
 >logically lead to the conclusion that he was dealing with
 >another type of radar device. Paper/foil was also used in common
 >civilian items like chewing gum and fiberglass insulation.
 >Certainly, he would not jump to the conclusion that it was
 >something unearthly. Neither would Col. Blanchard for that
 >matter.

And where's your evidence that Col. Blanchard ever came to the
conclusion that what was recovered was "unearthly"? That's news
to me. This was barely two weeks after the Arnold sighting. The
flying disks could have come from any number of places at the
time, as far as Blanchard, or, for that matter, Marcel was
concerned.

And who made Marcel a materials specialist, anyway? You? He
flips out a Zippo and reportedly can't burn it, a pocket knife
that reportedly can't cut it, and someone else reportedly wields
a sledge hammer that won't dent it -- and everyone consequently
concludes it's ergo facto unearthly? Maybe you could show us a
picture of a carry-all which included a sledge hammer as
standard equipment?

 >This is so garbled, I don't know what's being said here. Marcel
 >thought they had found a flying saucer of unearthly origin
 >because the _physical properties_ of the material did not match
 >anything made by man, not because he had allegedly never seen a
 >radar target or weather balloon before. Marcel was not the only
 >person to describe such properties either.

Since when was Marcel in a position to dictate that certain low
level on-the-scene tests (cigarette lighter, pocket knife, etc.)
did not "match anything made by man"?

 >I would like to reemphasize this point. If there had been
 >nothing to back up Marcel's story, it would have been dismissed
 >long ago as the ravings of a single loony. Roswell is _not_ just
 >the story of Jesse Marcel. There are a lot of witnesses and
 >documentation backing up Marcel's story (see, e.g., "Mogul
 >shredded" for how a computer analysis of the Fort Worth photos
 >clearly supports Marcel's story of a balloon and target being
 >substituted by Ramey to get the press off their backs).

Let's see...what did you say about some of Hutchinson's stuff?
Laughable, stupid? Why don't we apply the same adjectives in the
context of your above remarks?

In short, it's laughable and stupid on your part to assert that
"a computer analysis of the Fort Worth photos clearly supports
Marcel's story of a balloon and target being substituted by
Ramey to get the press off their backs."

You could computer analyze those pictures until all the dairy
cows in the world came home and it wouldn't shed one ray of
light on Marcel's anecdotal claim that material was switched.
All a computer analysis of those pictures would show...is a
computer analysis of those pictures.

And those pictures show a balloon and rawin device. They don't
show _any_ evidence of a switch. Unless you've got a a heckuva
lot better computer than I've got.

Clearly supports? No. Laughable and stupid? Yes.

I know... you're going to tell me to go back and re-read Roswell
Shredded. And I'm going to say, No, just re-read and respond to
the above issue.

In a succinct 500 words or less. Well, we all know that's
impossible. But if you could keep it under 10,000 words I think
we'd all appreciate it. There will be other days (and posts),
after all.


Dennis Stacy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Coleman

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:22:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:45:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Coleman


 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:24:59 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >I'll be surprised if it gets as much interest as Beautiful Mind
 >or Black Hawk Down, etc.

Actually, early box office reports indicate that The Mothman
Prophecies ($11.8 million) was the fourth most popular film in
the country, with A Beautiful Mind ($11.7 million) fifth. Of
course, they could flipflop positions. Interestingly, as I
mentioned on Errol's radio program, A Beautiful Mind actually
does have MIBs in it, and The Mothman Prophecies does not.

Black Hawk Down (also a Sony film like TMP) stayed at the top, I
think for obvious reasons during these warring times.

Does anyone know what ranking Close Encounters of the Third Kind
had on its opening weekend in 1977? Of course, it was a Steven
Spielberg film, so the comparison is perhaps not entirely fair.
Still, I'm looking for a yardstick.

:-)


Best wishes,

Loren

http://www.lorencoleman.com

for more...
Mothman Central
http://www.paraview.com/mothman_central.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                        Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:43:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:51:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Friedman


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:31:50 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>I completely agree that David's analysis is right on and very
 >>well done. However, I must again reiterate other facts that make
 >>it totally incorrect to suggest that this one balloon was what
 >>Brazel found, and was observed in situ by Marcel and Cavitt, and
 >>had something to do with the Mogul Program.

 >>A. Many Evening Newspapers on July 8, 1947 (from Chicago West)
 >>noted that the material was found by Brazel "sometime last
 >>week". That alone rules out Mogul Balloon wreckage since, as has
 >>been noted,it would have been very badly deteriorated if it had
 >>been out there since mid June.

 >Stan,

 >How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >something?

 >But let's say its now lain outside from mid-June to the
 >beginning of July. Do you know what the specific weather
 >conditions were then, whether they consisted of days of full
 >sunshine, partly cloudy skies, or contiguous days of overcast
 >skies? I submit that you don't.

 >Do you know if it rained on this day or that and wetted the
 >material, which might have resisted its deterioration? No, you
 >don't.

 >If you are as familiar with weather in the desert Southwest as
 >you pretend to be, then you know full well that a recorded
 >thunderstorm in, say, Roswell, says absolutely nothing about the
 >meteorological conditions five or ten miles away, never mind as
 >far away as the Foster ranch. Ditto reports of clear, sunny
 >skies in Roswell.

 >The fact of the matter is that you don't know what the local
 >weather was like during the period involved and so can't make
 >the above argument. At least not as confidently and assertively
 >as you do.

 >In addition, you would need to assess the deterioration exposure
 >factor, to coin a phrase, of the balloon material in the
 >pictures taken in Ramey's office and tell us how many days of
 >exposure or deterioration you think it represents.

 >Next, maybe you and Rudiak could tell us what degree of
 >deteriorated balloon material Ramey ordered up in order to
 >substitute for the real debris. Did he order up a balloon
 >deteriorated three, five, seven, or 14 days, and under what
 >specific conditions?

 >Wouldn't he just have ordered anything available? But, if so,
 >why would it have been a deteriorated balloon and a wrecked
 >rawin? Why couldn't he have shown the press relatively new,
 >intact ones? The press wouldn't have been any wiser.

 >Or maybe you're suggesting that Lawton, Roswell, and other bases
 >routinely kept on hand weathered balloons and wrecked rawins.
 >Why? Because general Ramey might one day need them for a press
 >conference and photo op?

 >Who would have this stuff lying around? No one, because there
 >would have been absolutely no reason to have it lying around.
 >Who would save a wrecked rawin target, made of balsa wood and
 >tin foil for any length of time? Do you think bases kept a
 >stockpile of this stuff?

 >The stuff pictured in Ramey's office is just what it pretends to
 >be: What Marcel picked up outside Roswell and accompanied to
 >Carswell.


Nice <snip>ping Dennis!!

You leave out the amount of wreckage, the fact that Brazel could
have hauled one balloon and radar target in his pickup to
Roswell, and there would have been absolutely no reason for
Marcel and Cavitt to go out there, that the discovery date
doesn't match MOGUL.

I can guarantee you it was very hot with loads of sunshine on
the longest days of the year. C.B. Moore tells us how
deteriorated the balloon would have been.

Nobody has indicated the balloon materials had the special
properties that have been noted etc., etc., etc.....

Another splendid example of 'don't bother me with the facts, my
mind is made up'.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                     Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:59:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:57:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Friedman


 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 20:52:37 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:43 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>The ballast should have been cut loose on descent and dropped
 >>many miles away, according to Mogul engineering diagrams. The
 >>Air Force and Charles Moore of Mogul tried to ascribe the "black
 >>box" to the black radiosonde battery packs. One trouble with
 >>this is Marcel, the old radio ham, would certainly have
 >>recognized it as such from the wires emerging from the pack or
 >>electrical contacts on the surface of any battery pack. See
 >>"Mogul shredded."

 >David,

 >Apart from the fact that the Hutchinson scenario might not have
 >been the way things actually unfolded, how did you acquire your
 >own psychic powers to the extent that you can assert with
 >certainty what Marcel would or wouldn't have recognized, and
 >under what circumstances?

 >>Amazing how you blithely dismiss this point with the wave of
 >>your hand as "immaterial." Even if Marcel knew nothing of radar
 >>targets, he could have reasoned by analogy with what he did
 >>know. The obvious similarity between the material used to make
 >>radar chaff (paper/foil) and radar targets (paper/foil) could
 >>logically lead to the conclusion that he was dealing with
 >>another type of radar device. Paper/foil was also used in common
 >>civilian items like chewing gum and fiberglass insulation.
 >>Certainly, he would not jump to the conclusion that it was
 >>something unearthly. Neither would Col. Blanchard for that
 >>matter.

 >And where's your evidence that Col. Blanchard ever came to the
 >conclusion that what was recovered was "unearthly"? That's news
 >to me. This was barely two weeks after the Arnold sighting. The
 >flying disks could have come from any number of places at the
 >time, as far as Blanchard, or, for that matter, Marcel was
 >concerned.

<snip>

Dennis, why not look at the 1979 interview with Jesse Marcel in
my movie 'UFOs Are Real'? Not only did he describe a large area
of wreckage, but also a total absence of conventional stuff like
wires, vacuum tubes, propellers. Balsa wood is easily broken.
The foil-paper stuff from the target was very easily torn.

He never told me that he went out to see a flying saucer or to
solve a mystery about flying saucers. His boss directed him to
take a CIC man (Cavitt) with him because of the strangeness of
the small amount of material Brazel brought to the Sheriff's
office as verified by the Sheriff.

RAAF was a natural target for spies. "Who was doing
reconaissance?" was an important question in NM.

Neither Blanchard nor Marcel nor the Sheriff was a stupid
person.

Judd Roberts noted that weather balloons were launched every day
from a block away from his radio station.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                   Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 05:16:56 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:00:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Hamilton


 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:24:59 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:08:18 -0600

 >>Listfolk,

 >>Helene and I saw The Mothman Prophecies movie last night and
 >>loved it. There are very few great Fortean films, but this is
 >>surely one of them. It's got everything - genuine creepiness, a
 >>thrilling, suspenseful storyline, intelligence, and all sorts of
 >>elements ufologists and Forteans will recognize. Director Mark
 >>Pellington is to be commended for resisting the temptation to
 >>turn John Keel's book into yet another dopey creature or
 >>science-fiction movie.

 >I didn't love it. It was OK. I thought they overused "hackneyed"
 >visual effects.

 >In the first half of the movie, at least, in an attempt to
 >manufacture creepiness when there was really nothing that
 >creepy. Also, I thought the movie started very slowly. Got
 >interesting in the last 1/3 or so. The ending scenes were the
 >most dramatic.

 >But my teenage children thought it was good.

 >I'll be surprised if it gets as much interest as Beautiful Mind
 >or Black Hawk Down, etc.

I liked it. The weird phone calls reminded me of a couple I had
over a decade ago. Weird stuff happens, but not repeatably
enough to study it. I found little creepiness in this movie.
Maybe the initial crash scene was supposed to be creepy, but
very little after that. Black Hawk Down was No. 1 again, but
Mothman opened in 4th place.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                     Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 05:23:23 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:02:18 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Hamilton


 >From: Matt Hurley <m.hurley@ntlworld.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO Photos Pre 1947
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:55:04 -0000

 >Dear List,

 >I am now collating photos of UFOs pre 1947.

 >http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.hurley/photos.html

 >If you have any images to add or information on the examples
 >already shown, please email me.

Comment:

Nice page. I like the sphere photos. These sphere or orbs
showing up around aircraft seem to be happening even recently.
These orbs appear luminous, dark, or metallic in daylight skies.
Still no answers unless someone thinks these are all balloons or
flares.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:01:26 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:09:24 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 21:36:38 -0500

 >9 UFOs Taped By Chilean Channel 13 Cameraman

 >Sunday January 27, 2002

 >Felipe Martinez was taping on assignment in Lota, Region VIII
 >of Chile when nine UFOs show up flying in formation at high
 >speed from south to north.

Do we have any information on the date and time-of-day of the
event?

It's always helpful to check:

http://www.satellite.eu.org/seesat/Jan-2002/index.html

for satellite entries, especially when the description is
multiple objects 'in formation'.


Jim Oberg








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                    Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:10:50 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:05:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Clark


 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 15:24:59 -0500
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>


 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:08:18 -0600

 >>Helene and I saw The Mothman Prophecies movie last night and
 >>loved it. There are very few great Fortean films, but this is
 >>surely one of them. It's got everything - genuine creepiness, a
 >>thrilling, suspenseful storyline, intelligence, and all sorts of
 >>elements ufologists and Forteans will recognize. Director Mark
 >>Pellington is to be commended for resisting the temptation to
 >>turn John Keel's book into yet another dopey creature or
 >>science-fiction movie.

 >I didn't love it. It was OK. I thought they overused "hackneyed"
 >visual effects.

What is the word hackneyed doing in scare quotes, Bruce? It _is_
a word used in standard English, and you're not quoting anybody
as far as I can tell.

 >In the first half of the movie, at least, in an attempt to
 >manufacture creepiness when there was really nothing that
 >creepy. Also, I thought the movie started very slowly. Got
 >interesting in the last 1/3 or so. The ending scenes were the
 >most dramatic.

Everyone is entitled to his or her taste in movies, of course,
but I disagree with everything Bruce says here. I thought
Mothman Prophecies was an extraordinarily well-done film,
resisting, not embracing, the hackneyed, and trying to come to
grips - in a manner both entertaining and thoughtful - with
complex concepts about the ultimate unknowableness of the
universe.

If it had been a hackneyed story, all would have been resolved
neatly in the end (as, no doubt, evil ETs or Satanic entities),
and on the way there, we would have seen Mothman bloodily
compiling a big body count. By being neither a horror nor a
science-fiction movie, director Mark Pellington gave us
something truly original, a piece of popular art that, I hope,
all Forteans will appreciate.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                    Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Kaeser

From: Steve Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:15:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:42:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie - Kaeser


 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:22:25 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Mothman Prophecies Movie
 >From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >Actually, early box office reports indicate that The Mothman
 >Prophecies ($11.8 million) was the fourth most popular film in
 >the country, with A Beautiful Mind ($11.7 million) fifth. Of
 >course, they could flipflop positions. Interestingly, as I
 >mentioned on Errol's radio program, A Beautiful Mind actually
 >does have MIBs in it, and The Mothman Prophecies does not.

 >Black Hawk Down (also a Sony film like TMP) stayed at the top, I
 >think for obvious reasons during these warring times.

One reviewer indicated that of the 25 or so who attended a
matinee of TMP, none was under 30 years old. This could mean a
short life-span for this film on the big screen. Then again, it
will have a solid audience for the sale of DVD and VHS
copies..... <g>


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                      Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - Hebert

From: Amy Hebert <yellowrose129@attbi.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:34:27 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:44:17 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - Hebert


 >From: Matt Hurley <m.hurley@ntlworld.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:55:04 -0000
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:59:30 -0500
 >Subject: UFO Photos Pre 1947

 >Dear List,

 >I am now collating photos of UFOs pre 1947.

 >http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.hurley/photos.html

 >If you have any images to add or information on the examples
 >already shown, please email me.

Dear Mr. Hurley:

After viewing the images you have posted on your web site, I am
wondering how you can be sure the anomalies in the photographs
are actually UFOs.

Do you have any kind of evidence that indicates the artifacts
found in these old photographs are indeed UFO's?

Were there any eye-witness testimonies that indicate UFOs were
actually seen when _each_ photograph was taken?


Thank you.

A. Hebert
IFO Database http://ifo.s5.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 28

                     Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.28.02

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:21:20 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:56:40 -0500
Subject: Eras News: Weekly Briefing 1.28.02


ERAS NEWS
The E-News Service of The Eras Project

http://www.geocities.com/erasproject

January 28, 2002

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
1.28.02


New Era Dawns in Search for Other Worlds
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/dusty_worlds_020123-1.html

How Our View of Ourselves Affects Beliefs About E.T.
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_survey_020124.html

Mars Odyssey Ready to Tackle Science Agenda
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/odyssey_update_020121.html

Simulating the Martian Surface at the Bottom of the World
http://pigtrail.uark.edu/news/2002/JAN02/BenoitR02.html

Future Mars Rovers to Change Shape, Rappel Cliffs
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/21/mars.rovers/index.html

The Cydonian Imperative: Mars Odyssey Spacecraft to Examine Face
http://mactonnies.com/cydonia.html

Is Black Hole Theory Full of Hot Air?
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/01/22/gravastars/index.html

NASA Prods Public to Tell Agency Where to Go, What to Do
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/tell_nasa_020124.html

Scientific Winds Blow Hot and Cold in Antarctica
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/01/25/antarctica.hot.cold/index.html


____________________________


Eras News is the e-news service of The Eras Project, providing
the latest news, reports and updates, including the Weekly
Briefing, sent free to your e-mail.

To subscribe, send an e-mail with Subscribe Eras News
in the subject line to:

psa@look.ca

To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with Unsubscribe Eras News in the
subject line to:

psa@look.ca

The Eras Project is a non-profit future studies project focusing
on 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.

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

=A9 The Eras Project, 2002






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:35:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:31:50 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>I completely agree that David's analysis is right on and very
 >>well done. However, I must again reiterate other facts that make
 >>it totally incorrect to suggest that this one balloon was what
 >>Brazel found, and was observed in situ by Marcel and Cavitt, and
 >>had something to do with the Mogul Program.

 >>A. Many Evening Newspapers on July 8, 1947 (from Chicago West)
 >>noted that the material was found by Brazel "sometime last
 >>week". That alone rules out Mogul Balloon wreckage since, as has
 >>been noted,it would have been very badly deteriorated if it had
 >>been out there since mid June.

 >Stan,

 >How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >something?

If he had found it the week before, then it already would have
been out in the sun for over 3 weeks. Charles Moore of Mogul has
demonstrated on a number of occasions how the neoprene balloons
deteriorated to a brittle "paper-ash" conditions within 2 to 3
weeks.

 >But let's say its now lain outside from mid-June to the
 >beginning of July. Do you know what the specific weather
 >conditions were then, whether they consisted of days of full
 >sunshine, partly cloudy skies, or contiguous days of overcast
 >skies? I submit that you don't.

And I submit that you are grasping at straws. There are going to
be more than a few sunny days in central New Mexico in a months
time in June and July.

As a matter of fact, I have checked weather maps for early and
middle June and early July. Mostly clear and sunny in the
earlier part of June. Thunderstorm activity in central N.M. July
2 and July 4.

 >Do you know if it rained on this day or that and wetted the
 >material, which might have resisted its deterioration? No, you
 >don't.

You just get so emotional when your pet Mogul explanation gets
mortally wounded. Whether or not the debris got rained on isn't
even the primary argument why the Rawin in Ramey's office
couldn't come from Mogul. IQBS -- It's the quantity of debris
stupid.

 >If you are as familiar with weather in the desert Southwest as
 >you pretend to be, then you know full well that a recorded
 >thunderstorm in, say, Roswell, says absolutely nothing about the
 >meteorological conditions five or ten miles away, never mind as
 >far away as the Foster ranch. Ditto reports of clear, sunny
 >skies in Roswell.

Quite right. The thunderstorms are in cells. I was in Arizona
and New Mexico for 10 days last August and it thunderstormed
every day. Most of the cells did miss my location, but I was
rained on about 4 or 5 times nonetheless during that period.

However, this is nothing but the usual Stacian tangent. The main
issue is that the debris in Ramey's office adds up to exactly
one radar target. The other Mogul radar targets somehow left no
debris behind when Mack Brazel gathered up _all_ the foil,
sticks, etc. into one bundle. How could that possibly happen?

 >The fact of the matter is that you don't know what the local
 >weather was like during the period involved and so can't make
 >the above argument. At least not as confidently and assertively
 >as you do.

 >In addition, you would need to assess the deterioration exposure
 >factor, to coin a phrase, of the balloon material in the
 >pictures taken in Ramey's office and tell us how many days of
 >exposure or deterioration you think it represents.

I can tell you that the balloon is obviously still pliable from
the way it is folded up and relatively intact. But if the
balloons had been left out for 2 to 3 weeks in the sun, they
would become brittle and fragmented. In his Air Force interview,
Moore's interviewer compared some samples to paper ash. I saw
Moore demonstrate this on Scientific American Frontiers a few
years back with Alan Alda. He said the material had been in the
sun for 2 to 3 weeks. It was in tatters. He held it near the
microphone and you could hear it rustling and crinkling like
cellophane.

 >Next, maybe you and Rudiak could tell us what degree of
 >deteriorated balloon material Ramey ordered up in order to
 >substitute for the real debris. Did he order up a balloon
 >deteriorated three, five, seven, or 14 days, and under what
 >specific conditions?

The neoprene balloons darkened very rapidly in the sun. Bob
Galganski showed me an experiment where the milky white neoprene
turned dark brown within 5 hours. The balloon in the Ramey
photos looks a little darker than that. A few days would be all
it would take. After only a few days, the balloon should still
be pliable - not enough time for the solvents to evaporate.
That seems to be the condition of the balloon in the photos.

The main point is that it is pliable an intact, not brittle and
flaked, the condition expected after a few weeks in the sun.

 >Wouldn't he just have ordered anything available? But, if so,
 >why would it have been a deteriorated balloon and a wrecked
 >rawin? Why couldn't he have shown the press relatively new,
 >intact ones? The press wouldn't have been any wiser.

A brand new balloon wouldn't look like it had lain in the desert
for weeks, would it? Ditto for a completely undamaged Rawin. It
would have to be torn up to give it the right crashed look.

 >Or maybe you're suggesting that Lawton, Roswell, and other bases
 >routinely kept on hand weathered balloons and wrecked rawins.

Recipe for one wrecked Rawin: Pull a brand new Rawin off the
shelf and tear it up by hand. Boy, that was hard!

Recipe for one weathered balloon: Call up neighboring bases and
ask if someone has turned in a relatively intact balloon from
one of hundreds of radiosonde balloons sent up in the previous
week with their reward tags.

 >Why? Because general Ramey might one day need them for a press
 >conference and photo op?

No, because nearly 200 of the radiosondes were sent up each and
every day and people were turning them all the time to get their
5$ reward -- a night on the town in 1947.

 >Who would have this stuff lying around? No one, because there
 >would have been absolutely no reason to have it lying around.
 >Who would save a wrecked rawin target, made of balsa wood and
 >tin foil for any length of time? Do you think bases kept a
 >stockpile of this stuff?

You don't need an old Rawin Dennis. Any Rawin will do because
they are so easily torn up to give the appearance of wreckage.
The fact that Ramey's Rawin has clean white paper and lacks the
suspension twine are further indications that this was an unused
Rawin.

You keep dodging the main point that the Rawin wreckage adds up
to exactly one Rawin target and nothing more. That's impossible
to explain from a multi-target Mogul crash. If you think it
isn't impossible, then by all means explain it to us.

 >The stuff pictured in Ramey's office is just what it pretends to
 >be: What Marcel picked up outside Roswell and accompanied to
 >Carswell.

The stuff pictured in Ramey's office is just what Marcel and
Dubose said it was: a balloon and radar target Ramey got from
somewhere for a photo-op to get the press off their backs.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 13:03:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:38:46 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:01:26 -0600

 >>From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 21:36:38 -0500

 >>9 UFOs Taped By Chilean Channel 13 Cameraman

 >>Sunday January 27, 2002

 >>Felipe Martinez was taping on assignment in Lota, Region VIII
 >>of Chile when nine UFOs show up flying in formation at high
 >>speed from south to north.

 >Do we have any information on the date and time-of-day of the
 >event?

 >It's always helpful to check:

 >http://www.satellite.eu.org/seesat/Jan-2002/index.html

 >for satellite entries, especially when the description is
 >multiple objects 'in formation'.


The day: Sunday January 27, 2002. No time-of-day given - only
during daytime.

Do we have satellites orbiting from the South to the North?
As far as I know, in that area, they fly from East to West.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                       Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 07:31:29 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:43:06 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947 - McCoy


 >From: Amy Hebert <yellowrose129@attbi.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Photos Pre-1947
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:34:27 -0600

Hello, all Amy,Matt


 >>From: Matt Hurley <m.hurley@ntlworld.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:55:04 -0000
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:59:30 -0500
 >>Subject: UFO Photos Pre 1947

 >>Dear List,

 >>I am now collating photos of UFOs pre 1947.

 >>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.hurley/photos.html

 >>If you have any images to add or information on the examples
 >>already shown, please email me.

 >Dear Mr. Hurley:

 >After viewing the images you have posted on your web site, I am
 >wondering how you can be sure the anomalies in the photographs
 >are actually UFOs.

 >Do you have any kind of evidence that indicates the artifacts
 >found in these old photographs are indeed UFO's?

 >Were there any eye-witness testimonies that indicate UFOs were
 >actually seen when _each_ photograph was taken?


Hello, Amy and Matt,

Actually its a collection of grainy, all ready printed in other
publications, photos of marginal clairity and dubious origin.
Sorry.

In amongst the collection are: Lenticular clouds, sunspots, a
chinse streetlamp, and doctored photos of read this; Well known
if not _famous_ photos of the Mighty Eighth Air Force on its way
to Berlin. I have no Idea that the souce of these photos could
be so incorrect , but the B-17 was hardly used in the
Mediterranian Theater,the B-24 Liberator was, and note: none of
of the B-17s in the pictures are late war B-17s.

The B-17s in the photos are all B-17Fs with the mid-war olive
drab and grey overall - no B-17Gs with the chin turret, not one
natural metal '17 either. This series of photos can't be later
than mid/late 1943, so the 1945 dates are incorrect.

The scene of a landing B-17 at the top of the series of photos
is from the movie (not the documentary made during the war)
'Memphis Belle' this is a B-17G that was used as an Airtanker
for many years by Aero Union - based in Chico CA. Oh, the photo
was shot in England on location - again nowhere near Italy.

As far as the 'Ghost Rocket' photo, I can't say - it looks like
a meteor - or a lens flaw. Not an expert there.

I am not going to comment on the photos of the Japanese 'Foo
Fighter' photos.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                      Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5@houston.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:50:54 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:45:21 -0500
Subject: Re: UFO Photos Pre 1947 - Fleming


 >From: Matt Hurley <m.hurley@ntlworld.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: UFO Photos Pre 1947
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 19:55:04 -0000

 >Dear List,

 >I am now collating photos of UFOs pre 1947.


These photographs are very interesting, especially the one
showing a formation of small objects with contrails that appear
to be pacing a WWII era plane. This and several other pictures
strongly resemble the descriptions of Foo Fighters that I've
read. Some of the photographs might be explained as lenticular
clouds or photographic defects, etc., but this one seems least
likely to me to fit any such cause. Have any photographic
experts examined these photos?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                      Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:42:38 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:56:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I - Rudiak


 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 20:52:37 -0600
 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:43 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>The ballast should have been cut loose on descent and dropped
 >>many miles away, according to Mogul engineering diagrams. The
 >>Air Force and Charles Moore of Mogul tried to ascribe the "black
 >>box" to the black radiosonde battery packs. One trouble with
 >>this is Marcel, the old radio ham, would certainly have
 >>recognized it as such from the wires emerging from the pack or
 >>electrical contacts on the surface of any battery pack. See
 >>"Mogul shredded."

 >Apart from the fact that the Hutchinson scenario might not have
 >been the way things actually unfolded,

You are allowed to propose any _plausible_ scenario you like
that economically explains the details. Just make sure it
doesn't make use of magical thinking and is not so incredibly
stupid that people die laughing.

 >how did you acquire your
 >own psychic powers to the extent that you can assert with
 >certainty what Marcel would or wouldn't have recognized, and
 >under what circumstances?

What's to recognizing rubber, aluminum foil, paper, balsa,
Scotch tape, twine, etc.? All these were common consumer items
found in items like inner tubes, kid's balloons, paper kites,
model airplanes, office supply, gum wrappers, candy wrappers,
cigarette wrappers, building insulation, etc.

Yet Marcel, among other people, clearly thought the actual
debris was highly unusual based on the tough physical properties
of the debris and the unusual "memory" property of some of the
foil. Remember, Marcel wasn't the only one to describe such
properties. There were other people like Brazel Jr., Loretta
Proctor, Bill Rickett of the CIC, Robert Smith, and Gen. Exon.

Yet all of the above named items from a balloon are extremely
fragile.

Now answer how debunkers like you know with such certainty that
Marcel couldn't recognize such materials, or had never seen a
weather balloon, or had never heard of or seen radar targets?
Such statements are made every day as if they were items of
fact, when apparently they are based on nothing but psychic
abilities and denial.

 >>Amazing how you blithely dismiss this point with the wave of
 >>your hand as "immaterial." Even if Marcel knew nothing of radar
 >>targets, he could have reasoned by analogy with what he did
 >>know. The obvious similarity between the material used to make
 >>radar chaff (paper/foil) and radar targets (paper/foil) could
 >>logically lead to the conclusion that he was dealing with
 >>another type of radar device. Paper/foil was also used in common
 >>civilian items like chewing gum and fiberglass insulation.
 >>Certainly, he would not jump to the conclusion that it was
 >>something unearthly. Neither would Col. Blanchard for that
 >>matter.

 >And where's your evidence that Col. Blanchard ever came to the
 >conclusion that what was recovered was "unearthly"? That's news
 >to me.

Everything seems to be news to you. You could start with
testimony of Art McQuiddy, the former editor of the Roswell
Morning Dispatch. In his affidavit he wrote:

   "Colonel William H. ("Butch") Blanchard, commander of RAAF
   and its 509th Bomb Group, was a good friend of mine. We often
   got together for a drink and off the record discussions of
   base-town relations and the like. After the flying saucer
   incident, I tried several times to get Blanchard to tell me
   the real story, but he repeatedly refused to talk about it.

   "About three or four months after the event, when we were a
   bit more 'relaxed' than usual, I tried again. Blanchard
   reluctantly admitted he had authorized the press release.
   Then, as best I remember, he said, "I will tell you this and
   nothing more. The stuff I saw, I've never seen anyplace else
   in my life." That was all he would say, and he never told me
   anything else about the matter,"

Then there is the matter of why Blanchard would send _both_ his
head of intelligence and counter-intelligence out to
investigate. Even ignoring the question of why Brazel didn't
bring those two small bundles with him to Roswell he claimed to
have gathered up in his Daily Record story, Brazel surely would
have provided a physical description like the one he provided in
the same story.

Remember in that story he claimed all he found were some rubber
strips from a balloon, sticks, tape, foil, and paper. Marcel
takes this description back to Blanchard and they somehow
conclude that this is worthy of serious investigation. No mere
flunkies were used, as would be expected from so humble a
description. No, Marcel himself, and Cavitt, head of the CIC,
are required. Blanchard orders them both to investigate. Why?
Was Blanchard a fool too?

 >This was barely two weeks after the Arnold sighting. The
 >flying disks could have come from any number of places at the
 >time, as far as Blanchard, or, for that matter, Marcel was
 >concerned.

All Marcel had to say about it was that when he went back to the
base to consult with Blanchard, the two of them decided it was
an advanced aircraft of some sort. They would not conclude that
if all Brazel described was rubber strips, tape, paper, foil,
etc. Obviously Brazel must have described something far
different, _or_ he actually did bring debris samples with him
(as the Sheriff's family said he did) that were highly unusual.

 >And who made Marcel a materials specialist, anyway? You? He
 >flips out a Zippo and reportedly can't burn it, a pocket knife
 >that reportedly can't cut it,

You think this is some sort of show-stopper point? These are the
sort of simple tests kids might try. Get a grip!

Ever known a flame that couldn't burn paper or balsa wood? Ever
known a pocket knife that couldn't cut paper, aluminum foil,
rubber balloons, balsa wood? Every known a thin balsa wood stick
that couldn't be easily broken? Ever seen aluminum foil that
could be wadded up and have it unfold itself?

You don't have to be a materials engineer to recognize these
physical properties as highly unusual.

 >and someone else reportedly wields
 >a sledge hammer that won't dent it -- and everyone consequently
 >concludes it's ergo facto unearthly?

Perhaps you can name materials available in 1947 that had these
properties?

 >Maybe you could show us a
 >picture of a carry-all which included a sledge hammer as
 >standard equipment?

Maybe you should get your facts straight first. Marcel said
somebody tried to dent some of the metal sheets with a sledge
hammer after he returned the base. Where did you get the notion
that the sledge hammer incident occurred out in the field?

Another person to describe the invulnerability to hammer blows
was Gen. Exon:


   "I don't know how it arrived, but the boys who tested it said
   it was very unusual. [Some of it] could be easily ripped or
   changed... ***There were other parts of it that were very
   thin but awfully strong and couldn't be dented with heavy
   hammers***...It was flexible to a degree... Some of it was
   flimsy and was tougher than hell, and the other was almost
   like foil but strong. It had them pretty puzzled. ...They
   knew they had something new in their hands. The metal and
   material was unknown to anyone I talked to. Whatever they
   found, I never heard what the results were. A couple of guys
   thought it might be Russian, but the overall consensus was
   that the pieces were from space. ...Roswell was the recovery
   of a craft from space."

Obviously the materials engineers at Wright Field were
describing Mogul balloon radar target aluminum foil that
couldn't be damaged with hammer blows. Some of them were like
Marcel, jumped the gun and concluded it was from a space ship.
The Air Force was full of incompetents and fools back then.

 >>This is so garbled, I don't know what's being said here. Marcel
 >>thought they had found a flying saucer of unearthly origin
 >>because the _physical properties_ of the material did not match
 >>anything made by man, not because he had allegedly never seen a
 >>radar target or weather balloon before. Marcel was not the only
 >>person to describe such properties either.

Yes indeed. See Gen. Exon's descriptions, e.g. Marcel obviously
wasn't the only person to conclude that the material "wasn't of
this Earth" because of the anomalous physical properties.

 >Since when was Marcel in a position to dictate that certain low
 >level on-the-scene tests (cigarette lighter, pocket knife, etc.)
 >did not "match anything made by man"?

He did some simple stress tests in the field that anybody might
do: try to break or bend pieces, cut them with a knife, burn
them, etc. Did he need orders from above or a degree in material
engineering to do this?

 >>I would like to reemphasize this point. If there had been
 >>nothing to back up Marcel's story, it would have been dismissed
 >>long ago as the ravings of a single loony. Roswell is _not_ just
 >>the story of Jesse Marcel.

And I'll remphasize this point. Roswell is not just the story of
Jesse Marcel.

 >>There are a lot of witnesses and
 >>documentation backing up Marcel's story (see, e.g., "Mogul
 >>shredded" for how a computer analysis of the Fort Worth photos
 >>clearly supports Marcel's story of a balloon and target being
 >>substituted by Ramey to get the press off their backs).

 >Let's see...what did you say about some of Hutchinson's stuff?
 >Laughable, stupid?

When I raised the point of why Marcel couldn't recognize a
simple rubber balloon, Hutchinson claimed Marcel would be unable
to separate out a rubber balloon from the radar target material,
something that Brazel himself claimed he did in his Daily Record
story. The balloon and radar target are also separate items in
the Fort Worth photos. Yes, I would consider Hutchinson's
"explanation" to be completely laughable and stupid, another
example of debunker magical thinking.

 >Why don't we apply the same adjectives in the
 >context of your above remarks?

Why don't you instead explain why my remarks are "laughable" and
"stupid." Was Marcel alone in describing anomalous physical
properties? No, lot's of people did, including Gen. Exon. Was
Marcel alone in saying there was a cover-up in Fort Worth, with
a balloon being substituted for the real debris? No, another AF
general backed him up here too, namely Brig. Gen. Dubose.

Is there any evidence in Marcel's file and that he screwed up
and the AF and officers involved thought less of him? No,
absolutely not. He remained as head of intelligence at Roswell.
He was recommissioned next spring. Blanchard boosted his rating
of Marcel on his next evaluations, calling him "highly
dependable," rating him superior in his abilitity to arrive at
logical conclusions. Blanchard and Dubose recommended him for
promotion afterwards. Dubose recommended he attend command
officers school. Ramey called him "outstanding" and command
officer material. The SAC and USAF Hq. squabbled over who was
going to get him for higher intelligence work. The SAC said they
already had him in mind for a "key" position. The SAC then made
him Chief of their "Alien Capabilities Section, Intelligence
Division, Hq." Get the point?

Again, explain for us why my statement that a lot of witnesses and
documentation back up Marcel's story is "laughable and stupid."

 >In short, it's laughable and stupid on your part to assert that
 >"a computer analysis of the Fort Worth photos clearly supports
 >Marcel's story of a balloon and target being substituted by
 >Ramey to get the press off their backs."

Again, why don't you clearly explain for us why my statement is
"laughable and stupid?"

My analysis unequivocably demonstrates that the radar target
debris on display in Ramey's office is fully accounted for by
exactly one radar target. There are no extra pieces in there
from other targets, as would definitely be expected from a
multi-target Mogul crash.

The target is also completely clean and there is no suspension
twine attached anywhere. Apparently the twine unknotted itself
and flew away with the other completely unhurt radar targets,
after being dragged through the dirt to shred the one target
that showed up Ramey's office.

There is no logical way to account for these details in any
Mogul crash scenario, without the use of drugs or magical
thinking. Occam's razor comes into play here. The simplest
theory with the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct.
The simplest way to account for the exactly one, clean, untwined
radar target is to start with one. Pull a fresh radar target off
the shelf somewhere, tear it up a little bit to make it look
like it crashed, and bring it out for a photo op to get the
press off their backs. That economically accounts for all the
details without magical thinking.

It's also the basic story told by Marcel and Dubose of what
actually happened in Fort Worth.

 >You could computer analyze those pictures until all the dairy
 >cows in the world came home and it wouldn't shed one ray of
 >light on Marcel's anecdotal claim that material was switched.

Sure it does. Try to come up with another plausible hypothesis
as to why exactly one radar target showed up Ramey's office.
Remember, no magical thinking allowed.

 >All a computer analysis of those pictures would show...is a
 >computer analysis of those pictures.

Complete denial and evasion at work here. No Dennis, the
computer analysis shows everything accounted for by one radar
target and nothing extra. There is no way to explain it with a
multi-target Mogul crash. Bye-bye Mogul.

Furthermore, the photoanalysis isn't just my say-so. The
analysis is based on something physical and objective and not
ancient, fuzzy memories. The photographs can be scrutinized by
anyone. Thus my analysis can be repeated by others and checked
for errors.

Perhaps you've heard of this process. It's called the scientific
method and peer review. It's certainly a lot more scientific and
objective than Charles Moore eyeballing the photos, declaring
there is more than one radar target there, and somebody like
Karl Pflock then hyping this opinion into an "unquestionable"
fact in his book that supposedly proves the debris is from
Mogul.

 >And those pictures show a balloon and rawin device. They don't
 >show _any_ evidence of a switch. Unless you've got a a heckuva
 >lot better computer than I've got.

 >Clearly supports? No. Laughable and stupid? Yes.

If you don't think this demonstrates a switch, then provide us
with a plausible scenario of how exactly one radar target could
be collected from a Mogul crash. I have challenged you at least
twice to explain this vital detail, and instead all we get is
your usual irrational, emotional diatribe in return.

Come on Dennis, explain it to us. How did Mack Brazel gather up
_all_ the sticks, foil, etc. into his _one_ bundle from your
multi-target Mogul crash, but only one, and exactly one target
shows up in Fort Worth? If my scenario is "laughable and
stupid," then provide us with an alterative that isn't
"laughable and stupid."

 >I know... you're going to tell me to go back and re-read Roswell
 >Shredded. And I'm going to say, No, just re-read and respond to
 >the above issue.

I already did. The one who isn't responding to the issues is
you. You're just ducking the questions that I posed in "Mogul
shredded." You don't have to answer them all. But do at least
explain the one and only one radar target for us. How can you
shred multiple targets in a Mogul crash and end up with just one
and not a fragment more?

The fact of the matter is you can't explain this, thus your
usual diversionary ranting.

 >In a succinct 500 words or less. Well, we all know that's
 >impossible. But if you could keep it under 10,000 words I think
 >we'd all appreciate it. There will be other days (and posts),
 >after all.

 >Dennis Stacy

Come on Dennis, answer the question. Stop stalling. No drugs or
magical thinking allowed. Try not to make your answer "laughable
and stupid."


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                  Canadian Crop Circle Summary Report 2001

From: Paul Anderson <psa@look.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 22:52:28 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:58:23 -0500
Subject: Canadian Crop Circle Summary Report 2001


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

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada

January 28, 2002

_____________________________


CANADIAN CROP CIRCLE SUMMARY REPORT 2001

The 2001 summary report is now posted on the web site, with an
overview of the 20 reports for the year, with photos and video
stills, including aerials and some of the unusual and complex
crop lays and other associated anomalies (the 'blind spot' at
Midale, Saskatchewan #5 in particular):

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/summary01.html

This report may be reprinted provided relevant credits given.
For convenience, a text-only copy (MS Word for Macintosh,
approximately 3,300 words) and separate photos are available by
request.

The Crop Circles in Canada 2001 report archive has also been
updated again, with additional photos for a number of formations
(and more still to come):

http://www.geocities.com/cropcirclecanada/circlescanada01.html

____________________________


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

To subscribe, send an e-mail with Subscribe CCCRN News
in the subject line to:
psa@look.ca

To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with Unsubscribe CCCRN News
in the subject line to:
psa@look.ca

The Canadian Crop Circle Research Network is a non-profit
research organization which has been investigating and
documenting the crop circle phenomenon and other possibly
related phenomena in Canada since 1995, creating a liason
between researchers, farmers, the public, the media and
scientists in trying to solve this ongoing enigma.

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

=A9 Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, 2002









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:33:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:01:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:43:19 -0400

<snip>

 >Nice <snip>ping Dennis!!


Stan,

But of course! I'm an editor, after all.

 >You leave out the amount of wreckage, the fact that Brazel could
 >have hauled one balloon and radar target in his pickup to
 >Roswell, and there would have been absolutely no reason for
 >Marcel and Cavitt to go out there, that the discovery date
 >doesn't match MOGUL.


I left out a lot of things - in order to address those points I
was addressing. For example: the amount of wreckage as testified
to by whom? As you are well aware, the amount of wreckage varies
from witness to witness. Along with the issue of whether or not
there was a gouge in the ground. And bodies, and a second, or
third, crash site, and so on. I can't revisit every aspect of
Roswell on those occasions when I want to refer to a particular
aspect. Nor do I expect you to do the same, though,
unfortunately, I expect that David Rudiak will.

But while we're here, what do you mean that the discovery date
doesn't match MOGUL?

 >I can guarantee you it was very hot with loads of sunshine on
 >the longest days of the year. C.B. Moore tells us how
 >deteriorated the balloon would have been.

No, you can't guarantee me what the weather was like during the
period in question, and that was one of my points. Contrary to
common sense, the rainy season of the desert southwest actually
falls during late summer. You can surmise what the weather might
have been like, but you can't guarantee it. Similarly, you can
surmise what area the debris field _might_ have covered, but you
can't guarantee it for the simple reason that you weren't there
then. Like the rest of us, all you have to go on is
contradictory anecdotal accounts. There are no guarantees out
there: if there were we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You also failed to address another issue I raised: what is the
deterioration date of the balloon pictured on Ramey's floor?
Seems as if you're not above some nice snipping of your own, by
the way. At least I identify mine.

 >Nobody has indicated the balloon materials had the special
 >properties that have been noted etc., etc., etc.....

 >Another splendid example of 'don't bother me with the facts, my
 >mind is made up'.


Well, I guess I could say the same: another splendid example of
someone who refuses to even countenance the possibility that
Roswell might not be quite as solid and extraterrestrial as
first presented.

While we're at it, let me ask you this: How many people, in the
course of your Roswell investigations, have you talked to who
said that absolutely nothing unusual occurred during the dates
in question? This would include Kent Lorenzo and others. And how
many of those have made it into your writings on Roswell? Some?
A few? None?

If none, why not? After all, aren't they a legitimate part of
the Roswell story, too?

But I forget: you're still holding out hope for Gerald Anderson.
How large was his debris field, by the way? Or maybe you've
finally given up on him?

Curious minds would like to know.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                                 UFO Dreams?

From: Joe McGonagle <joem_cgonagle@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 01:38:25 -0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:03:32 -0500
Subject: UFO Dreams?


This may seem uncharacteristic of me, but I am interested in
dreams involving a number of UFOs.

The reason for this is that I had one some time ago, and thought
it was because of the amount of time that I was spending on the
subject. Since then, I have received unsolicited posts from two
other people who described dreams, which although not identical,
had some common factors. I am also aware of two other people
(via a third party) that have had similar dreams.

I don't want to go in to the details of the dreams, or what the
common factors were at this time, as I want to try to discover
if this is a common dream-type without suggesting what the
details of the dreams that I am looking for are.

If anyone has had a dream or dreams involving more than one UFO,
please email me on my address above, with as much or as little
detail as you can remember. You can rest assured that I will not
reveal anyone's participation in this without their express
permission.


Regards,

Joe McGonagle








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                       Canadians & Manned Spaceflight

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:03:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:14:13 -0500
Subject: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight


Hi everyone.

Below is a book mentioned in SPACE.COM which will be of interest
to those who wish to know about some of the unheralded people,
many of them Canadians, who made American manned spaceflight a
reality.

Canadians may have been among the earliest pioneers of manned
spaceflight of modern times but probabaly not the first. Just
today I learned from a Russian student with high level contacts
at the Korolev space research facility in Russia about several
failed attempts made by the Soviets in the 1950s to send humans
into space. What this student also told me was a very intriguing
account of a 1944 failed attempt by Nazi Germany to be the first
to send a man into space through the efforts of their rocket
scientists and engineers which, like the Canadians, eventually
ended up working for the U.S. (and the Soviet) space program.

What does all this have to do with UFOs you ask? Well, there is
an eccentric and very secrective individual west of Toronto who,
according to his friends, has an AVRO flying saucer among his
huge collection of aircraft and parts. This is not the disk
shaped AVRO Car that simply hovered but a secret one which could
fly to the edge of space and move at supersonic speeds just like
the newspapers claimed at the time. Many strange sightings of
extremely high altitude contrails created by something moving at
Mach 7 made by upper atmosphere scientists strongly suggests
that Canadian engineers may very well have been just as
successful with the AVRO Car (a later version shown flying in
space appears on a recent cover of 'Popular Mechanics') as they
were with the AVRO Arrow (and the Apollo Project).

<snip>

* Featured Book: Arrows to the Moon: Avro's Engineers and the
Space Race

http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books/library_gainor_020125.html

On February 20, 1959, the Canadian government shut down the
CF-105 Avro Arrow jet interceptor program, putting the cream of
Canada's aerospace engineering talent out of work.

<snip>

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates

From: Robert Gates <>RGates8254@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:05:42 EST
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:19:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:31:50 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>I completely agree that David's analysis is right on and very
 >>well done. However, I must again reiterate other facts that make
 >>it totally incorrect to suggest that this one balloon was what
 >>Brazel found, and was observed in situ by Marcel and Cavitt, and
 >>had something to do with the Mogul Program.

 >>A. Many Evening Newspapers on July 8, 1947 (from Chicago West)
 >>noted that the material was found by Brazel "sometime last
 >>week". That alone rules out Mogul Balloon wreckage since, as has
 >>been noted,it would have been very badly deteriorated if it had
 >>been out there since mid June.


 >Stan,

 >How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >something?

Since Dennis seems to like a "How do you know questions" I
propose the following:

Dennis, how do you know for a fact that a Mogul balloon (Flight
4) was in fact launched, and in fact landed at the Foster Ranch?

Answer: In fact you don't, and in fact the "closest" anybody in
theory can put the Mogel balloon is 17 miles.  The theory behind
that is just as reliable as the jewel encrusted helmet story.

Bottom line is all we have concerning Mogel could be sumed up
with "the 17 mile theory"

 >But let's say its now lain outside from mid-June to the
 >beginning of July. Do you know what the specific weather
 >conditions were then, whether they consisted of days of full
 >sunshine, partly cloudy skies, or contiguous days of overcast
 >skies? I submit that you don't.

Kind of like people trying to turn 17 miles into 1/2 a mile.

 >Do you know if it rained on this day or that and wetted the
 >material, which might have resisted its deterioration? No, you
 >don't.

 >If you are as familiar with weather in the desert Southwest as
 >you pretend to be, then you know full well that a recorded
 >thunderstorm in, say, Roswell, says absolutely nothing about the
 >meteorological conditions five or ten miles away, never mind as
 >far away as the Foster ranch. Ditto reports of clear, sunny
 >skies in Roswell.

Agreed on this one. You can have totally clear weather at a
city, and 15 miles away have a downpour that lasts for hours.
Point here being is sunlight and many other factors also
contribute to the deterioration of materials. You can also have
cold nights and hot days which also contribute to deterioration
and on and on. The essence is as soon as the material hit
ground, it likely started to deterioriate.

 >The fact of the matter is that you don't know what the local
 >weather was like during the period involved and so can't make
 >the above argument. At least not as confidently and assertively
 >as you do.

 >In addition, you would need to assess the deterioration exposure
 >factor, to coin a phrase, of the balloon material in the
 >pictures taken in Ramey's office and tell us how many days of
 >exposure or deterioration you think it represents.

In some regards you seem to agree with the RPIT, that being that
the material in Rameys office came from the debris field at
Roswell. Most of us look at the photos and come to the
conclusion that the material laying in Rameys office was likely
a Rawin target that the General troted out for a photo op.

 >Next, maybe you and Rudiak could tell us what degree of
 >deteriorated balloon material Ramey ordered up in order to
 >substitute for the real debris. Did he order up a balloon
 >deteriorated three, five, seven, or 14 days, and under what
 >specific conditions?

 >Wouldn't he just have ordered anything available? But, if so,
 >why would it have been a deteriorated balloon and a wrecked
 >rawin? Why couldn't he have shown the press relatively new,
 >intact ones? The press wouldn't have been any wiser.

 >Or maybe you're suggesting that Lawton, Roswell, and other bases
 >routinely kept on hand weathered balloons and wrecked rawins.
 >Why? Because general Ramey might one day need them for a press
 >conference and photo op?

 >Who would have this stuff lying around? No one, because there
 >would have been absolutely no reason to have it lying around.
 >Who would save a wrecked rawin target, made of balsa wood and
 >tin foil for any length of time? Do you think bases kept a
 >stockpile of this stuff?

 >The stuff pictured in Ramey's office is just what it pretends to
 >be: What Marcel picked up outside Roswell and accompanied to
 >Carswell.

Just like the RPIT team only seems to see alien debris, and
others can only see 'Mogul' and yet others can only see Rawin,
you give the impression that the only thing you see, and will
ever see is something along the lines of 'Marcel picked up
balloon debris, took it to Ramey's office, got some photographs
taken...' In the end, the theory is still 17 miles short!


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                       Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:53:37 -700
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:01:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >>Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >>he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >>original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >>something?

 >If he had found it the week before, then it already would have
 >been out in the sun for over 3 weeks. Charles Moore of Mogul has
 >demonstrated on a number of occasions how the neoprene balloons
 >deteriorated to a brittle "paper-ash" conditions within 2 to 3
 >weeks.

This is from a previous UFO UpDates post at:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/jun/m13-009.shtml

-----

From: legion@werple.net.au [John Stepkowski]
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:09:43 +1000 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:40:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Reply to Dennis Stacy

<snip

Prof. Moore was asked to sign a statement affirming that the
balloons degraded in a matter of _days_. Moore contacted Robert
Todd (_Cowflop Quarterly_, Vol 1. No.  1), and informed him that
the Air Force had got it wrong. It took _months_ for the
_material_ to deteriorate into a charred paper and ash-like
state.

-----

Regards,

Bruce Hutchinson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                          UFO Alarm In Turkish City

From: Erol Erkmen <andromeda@ultratv.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 17:02:53 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:17:22 -0500
Subject: UFO Alarm In Turkish City


The Mayor of Adyyaman City, Turkey, Halil Ipyk reports that
moving lights were observed in the sky from five different
locations on January 26-27 and the relevent authorities have
been informed.

Ipyk also stated, in his written report, that police departments
received many calls about the lights on January 26, at about
23:00hrs, which were over the eastern part of the city.(Regions
Tut, Golbasy, Besni)

See: http://www.tuvpo.com/news/adiyaman.gif

Traffic police, who were on duty at the time, in this region
confirmed the lights on Adyyaman-Kahta cable. They reported that
regional securty police were sent to this area immediately and
the star-shaped objects were scattering lights, and rotating on
their axis, and were caught by the night vison police camera (6
hours!)

Also on Jan 27 two of those objects with lights were observed on
the west side of Adyyaman at 02.15. They were also observed from
the roof of the Security Department on Jan 29, at 02:03 and
caught by the camera. Those same lights were also confirmed by
some police authorities and staff on the same date in the Besni
region and near the city center. Video footage will be shown
soon by TUVPO's Project PULSAR at:

http://www.tuvpo.com/eng.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:26:36 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:19:52 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 13:03:19 -0500

 >The day: Sunday January 27, 2002. No time-of-day given - only
 >during daytime.

 >Do we have satellites orbiting from the South to the North?
 >As far as I know, in that area, they fly from East to West.

Thanks. Actually, East to West is the only direction satellites
_don't_ fly.

Polar orbits - South-to-North and North-to-South - are very
common.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                     Re: oswell Threads Pt I - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:37:00 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:22:21 -0500
Subject: Re: oswell Threads Pt I - Lehmberg


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:42:38 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 20:52:37 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:43 EST
 >>>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads Pt I
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >>In a succinct 500 words or less. Well, we all know that's
 >>impossible. But if you could keep it under 10,000 words I think
 >>we'd all appreciate it. There will be other days (and posts),
 >>after all.

...It's right about here you provide the most ample
demonstration of your inability to make your point, add anything
to the discussion, or appear _remotely_ balanced, Mr. Stacy.
This patently inappropriate, essentially inaccurate, and
pompously inconsequential snipe about post length is but one
refuge of the intellectual scoundrel, and would never have been
made to Stewart or Todd whose posts were most times so tediously
robust that my mail reader would occasionally cough up a silicon
hairball... Moreover? If his posts were any shorter you'd
complain that they were cursory and incomplete.

 >>Dennis Stacy

 >Come on Dennis, answer the question. Stop stalling. No drugs or
 >magical thinking allowed.

...Damn Mr. R. - I guess that rules out _any_ thinking!

 >Try not to make your answer "laughable
 >and stupid."

Awwp! Tall order, that! I guess we'll have to settle for its
ready alternate: stupidly laughable. <g>.


  Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his VSN 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
the specious and scabrous 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:15:45 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:23:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Rimmer


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 12:52:34 -0600

 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>But how about this for purple prose - can you guess who wrote
 >>it?

 >>"...John A. Keel, a veteran critic of ETH whose work we have
 >>long admired... Keel has probably spent more time in the field
 >>than any other private researcher. This fact has afforded him
 >>the opportunity to view the UFO mystery from the inside, and not
 >>from the distorted perspective of most UFO literature, written
 >>usually to enhance belief in interplanetary visitors, which
 >>blithely ignores the evidence inconsiderate enough not to fit
 >>the author's preconceptions."

 >Without checking, I'd say this looks like something I could have
 >written, and probably did write, 25 to 35 years ago (otherwise,
 >why would you be citing it?). I can go you one better: Loren
 >Coleman and I actually dedicated our book Creatures of the Outer
 >Edge (written in 1975, published in 1978) to Keel. As I have
 >never made a secret (see, most recently, my article in the next
 >issue of Fortean Times), I once thought John was a cool guy with
 >great ideas. Eventually, of course, as my intellect and
 >understanding evolved, I changed my mind.

 >Speaking of which, John, when was the last time _you_ changed
 >your mind about anything ufological in the past 25 to 35 years?
 >As far as I can tell, your psychosocial obsession has been
 >locked in concrete for as long as I can remember.

I have changed my views quite considerably over the past 25 - 30
years. At one time I was attracted all sorts of 'occult' ideas
to explain UFOs.

Unfortunately my change has been in the direction of greater
scepticism. The more I learned about UFOs and the people who
study them, the more I realised that there was no need to invoke
unknown forces to explain UFOs. As even from the beginning I was
never a particular fan of the ETH you probably haven't noticed.

Perhaps you might be persuaded to make some critical comment
about those people whose extraterrestrial obsessions have been
locked in concrete as long as any of us can remember.


--
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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                 Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:43:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:27:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - Oberg


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:03:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight

 >Below is a book mentioned in SPACE.COM which will be of interest
 >to those who wish to know about some of the unheralded people,
 >many of them Canadians, who made American manned spaceflight a
 >reality.

This is a genuine item of pride for the Canadians, who made some
crucial design teams and engineers available to NASA after their
own government canceled its domestic high-performance aircraft
projects.


 >Canadians may have been among the earliest pioneers of manned
 >spaceflight of modern times but probabaly not the first. Just
 >today I learned from a Russian student with high level contacts
 >at the Korolev space research facility in Russia about several
 >failed attempts made by the Soviets in the 1950s to send humans
 >into space. What this student also told me was a very intriguing
 >account of a 1944 failed attempt by Nazi Germany to be the first
 >to send a man into space through the efforts of their rocket
 >scientists and engineers which, like the Canadians, eventually
 >ended up working for the U.S. (and the Soviet) space program.

These stories do seem to bear a striking similarity to some
aspects of 'UFO lore', because they are frequently retold and
passed on as 'inside information' but have no historical basis.
Space historians have thoroughly investigated the possibilities
of 'secret Soviet space fatalities' and have concluded the
stories are all myth, no matter. The story of a Nazi astronaut
on a V-2 is also evidently without foundation, perhaps based on
a highly distorted account of the death of a German pilot in a
special crew pod on a V-1 cruise missile (not built for space
flight).


Jim Oberg








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                         2002 - The Year Of The MIB

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:56:38 CST
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:32:32 -0500
Subject: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB


It gets stranger and stranger.

So far in 2002, we have 3 (three) Hollywood movies, either out
already or soon to be released, which feature Men In Black as
significant characters.

The Mothman Prophecies (in which you never get a good look at
Indrid Cold, but he may have been the "first" MIB case
encountered by a UFO investigator), MIB2 (with Will Smith
returning in the same role), and A Beautiful Mind (with Ed
Harris as John Nash's clandestine tormentor).

[Incidentally - A Beautiful Mind is receiving a lot of criticism
for glamorising Nash's life a bit too much, leaving out details
of his affairs, divorce, homosexual encounters, eviction from
Rand, etc. What's more, of relevance to ufology is that Nash
most distressed his colleagues when he slumped over the table at
a meeting one day, exhausted from trying to decipher the
messages to him that aliens (not the Russians) were placing in
newspapers, messing with his mind.]

Finally, I must make note of a new theatrical musical which
features - believe it or not - MIB singing and dancing in a
stage production. Several characters listed as "Mysterious Men
In Black" appear and disappear in and out of scenes, shadowing
other characters, throughout You Can't Beat Fun, a revival of a
musical originally staged in 1940! The MIB even get a musical
number where they sing memorable lines like: "We have just come
here to see/What kind of talent there may be."

The show opens in Canada on February 20, 2002.

Yes, I have opening night tickets.


Chris Rutkowski

Media Relations Coordinator
Public Affairs Department
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
R3T 2N2
voice:  (204) 474-9514
e-mail: Chris_Rutkowski@umanitoba.ca








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                  Aging NASA Spacecraft To Re-enter Earth's

From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:20:11 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:46:24 -0500
Subject: Aging NASA Spacecraft To Re-enter Earth's


Dolores Beasley
Headquarters, Washington          Jan. 29, 2002
(Phone: 202/358-1753)

Nancy Neal
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
(Phone: 301/286-0039)

RELEASE: 02-16

AGING NASA SPACECRAFT TO REENTER EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE

Engineers at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.,
predict a 7,000-pound spacecraft could re- enter the Earth's
atmosphere as early as 10 p.m. EST on Jan. 30 or as late as 7
a.m. EST on Jan. 31.

NASA's Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer (EUVE) is currently 200
kilometers (124 miles) above the Earth with a descent rate of 25
kilometers (15.5 miles) a day. The estimated debris field is
expected to be 800 to 1,000 kilometers (500-625 miles).

"The probability of the few EUVE surviving pieces falling into a
populated area and hurting someone is very small. It is more
likely that the small pieces will fall into the ocean or fall
harmlessly to the ground," said Ronald E. Mahmot, Project
Manager for Space Science Mission Operations at Goddard.

Unlike the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory, which was safely
de-orbited June 4, 2000, EUVE does not have an on-board
propulsion system to allow engineers to control its re-entry.
Much of EUVE will burn up in the atmosphere before ever reaching
the ground. However, estimates show that up to nine objects
ranging from approximately four to 100 pounds may survive
re-entry. Much of this debris is made of titanium and stainless
steel.

EUVE will start to break up when it falls to within 80
kilometers (50 miles) of the Earth. At this point, EUVE will
have only four or five 90-minute orbits left before re- entering
the Earth's atmosphere. Engineers will not know the re-entry
point until approximately 12 hours prior to impact.

EUVE is in a 28.5-degree orbit and could re-enter in any
location within this orbit range. This ranges includes areas as
far north as Orlando, Fla., and as far south as Brisbane,
Australia.

EUVE was launched on June 7, 1992. Science operations ended for
the spacecraft in December 2001. During its early years, EUVE
was operated from Goddard. In 1997, control of EUVE was
transitioned from Goddard to the University of California,
Berkeley and remained there until the program's termination in
2001. Slated for only three years, EUVE was operational for
eight. NASA twice extended its scientific mission.

During its eight years in orbit, EUVE successfully opened a new
window on the cosmos and helped to bridge the gap in our
understanding of the extreme ultraviolet spectrum. Rather than
seeing about 24 nearby objects as many predicted, EUVE observed
more than 1,000 nearby sources, including more than three dozen
objects outside our galaxy.

Additional background information about EUVE is available on the
Internet at:

http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/euve/euve.html

               -end-


               * * *

NASA press releases and other information are available automatically
by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov.
In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type
the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes). The system will
reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription. A second
automatic message will include additional information on the service.
NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command
GO NASA. To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail
message to domo@hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only
"unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 29

                  Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:48:57 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 14:11:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:15:45 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 12:52:34 -0600

 >>>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology


John,

 >I have changed my views quite considerably over the past 25 - 30
 >years. At one time I was attracted all sorts of 'occult' ideas
 >to explain UFOs.

I'll take you at your word for that, but I haven't observed that
in your writing, which (if memory serves) I first encountered
around 1970 or not long thereafter. I do know that one time,
before its current view locked in, the psychosocial crowd was
willing to incorporate parapsychological theories (not the same
as occult beliefs) into its explanatory efforts, but as its
approach evolved into a variant of Menzelism and Klassism, that
was jettisoned, too.

 >Unfortunately my change has been in the direction of greater
 >scepticism. The more I learned about UFOs and the people who
 >study them, the more I realised that there was no need to
 >invoke unknown forces to explain UFOs.

The more I have learned of the UFO phenomenon and the people who
attempt to debunk it, the more convinced I have become of the
uselessness of explanations that seek, with ever more
desperation and irrelevance, to deny the role of unknown forces
behind the most puzzling UFO reports.

 >Perhaps you might be persuaded to make some critical comment
 >about those people whose extraterrestrial obsessions have been
 >locked in concrete as long as any of us can remember.

Maybe they were paying closer attention than you and I were.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                  Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:51:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:28:26 -0500
Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:56:38 CST
 >Subject: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB

 >It gets stranger and stranger.

 >So far in 2002, we have 3 (three) Hollywood movies, either out
 >already or soon to be released, which feature Men In Black as
 >significant characters.

<snip>

Maybe they are trying to desensitize the general public to their
appearance and presence?!


Jean M.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                        Re: Mogul Shredded - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:30:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Tonnies


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >You just get so emotional when your pet Mogul explanation gets
 >mortally wounded. Whether or not the debris got rained on isn't
 >even the primary argument why the Rawin in Ramey's office
 >couldn't come from Mogul. IQBS -- It's the quantity of debris

Perhaps - if Mogul is indeed the correct interpretation - Ramey
didn't feel it was at all necessary to litter every corner of
his office with balloon debris to get the point across to the
press. The solitary shredded Rawin we see in the photos may have
been a representative sampling.

I'm not suggesting that a single Rawin was what crashed at the
Foster ranch. But if the debris was terrestrial and extensive,
as indicated by Marcel, why bother lugging the entirety of it to
Carswell? A "sample" would do nicely for PR purposes.

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com) (816) 561-0190
105 Ward Parkway #900, Kansas City, MO 64112

Visit http://mactonnies.com
Transcelestial Ontology and Postmillennial Studies









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:43:44 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:31:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:53:37 -700
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>>How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >>>Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >>>he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >>>original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >>>something?

 >>If he had found it the week before, then it already would have
 >>been out in the sun for over 3 weeks. Charles Moore of Mogul has
 >>demonstrated on a number of occasions how the neoprene balloons
 >>deteriorated to a brittle "paper-ash" conditions within 2 to 3
 >>weeks.

 >This is from a previous UFO UpDates post at:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/jun/m13-009.shtml

 >-----

 >From: legion@werple.net.au [John Stepkowski]
 >Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:09:43 +1000 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:40:53 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Reply to Dennis Stacy

 ><snip>

 >Prof. Moore was asked to sign a statement affirming that the
 >balloons degraded in a matter of _days_. Moore contacted Robert
 >Todd (_Cowflop Quarterly_, Vol 1. No. 1), and informed him that
 >the Air Force had got it wrong. It took _months_ for the
 >_material_ to deteriorate into a charred paper and ash-like
 >state.


Bruce, this is just another example of how Moore's story
continues to evolve to whatever he wants it to be. Moore has
_repeatedly_ demonstrated how the neoprene rapidly deteriorates
in N.M. sun in a matter of 2 to 3 weeks to a tattered, brittle,
ashlike state. But when it was pointed out several years ago
that the Fort Worth balloon material was apparently still intact
and pliable, Moore changed his story to it taking several months
to deteriorate.

Wendy Connors also just e-mailed a photo of Moore she took only
a year ago holding up one of his neoprene sheets that had been
exposed for only 2 weeks. Again, it is black and in tatters. I
am going to e-mail this photo to you and Dennis Stacy. Please
examine the photo and let the Updates crowd know whether I am
misrepresenting anything here.

Thus as recently as 2000, Moore was still demonstrating the
rapid deterioration of the neoprene. On Monday, Wednesday, and
Friday, it takes only 2 to 3 weeks to deteriorate into a
brittle, tattered state. But on Tuesday, Thursday, and
Saturday, it takes months so he can maintain the fiction that
the balloon in the Fort Worth photos is consistent with a
balloon that has sat out in the sun for a month. He speaks out
of both sides of his mouth.

Here is also a response to Dennis Stacy I wrote 3 years ago on
the issue.

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/sep/m18-020.shtml

Me:
 >>"Smoky grey" "rubber strips" which he said he rolled into a
 >>bundle. Unfortunately, if the "neoprene" had actually lain out
 >>in the hot sun for a month (Brazel said he recovered it July 4,
 >>exactly one month of your alleged Mogul crash), the material
 >>would no longer have resembled rubber nor had any elasticity
 >>left. After two or three weeks, the sunlight reduced the
 >>neoprene balloons to a brittle, ashlike state, according to
 >>Mogul engineer Charles Moore. So "strange" indeed that his
 >>rubber description didn't match what one would expect for some
 >>month-old balloons.

Dennis Stacy:

 >For what it's worth, I believe that Moore has since changed this
 >to a couple of months, based partly on experimentation.

Me:

It's not worth too much, since Moore has been all over the place
on this issue. As recently as last November (1997) on Scientific
American Frontiers (PBS TV), he held up a piece of neoprene
weather balloon material which he said he had left in the New
Mexico sun for only two to three weeks. It was blackened, in
tatters, falling apart, and you could clearly hear it crinkle
like cellophane, indicating it had gotten stiff and lost its
elasticity. He did the same demonstraton when interviewed by the
Air Force in 1994 by Lt. McAndrew. He told McAndrew he had left
the sample in the sun for three weeks. McAndrew compared it to
"paper ash." And in his Air Force affidavit (initialed twice for
each paragraph by Moore certifying his agreement), it was
written, "Some of the material would almost look like dark gray
or black flakes or ashes after exposure to the sun for _only_a_
_few_days_."

It looks to me that when it's pointed out that the material
shown in Fort Worth doesn't look like "flakes" or "ashes" though
supposedly exposed to the sun for a full month (based on
Brazel's RDR interview), but instead looks like a still
relatively intact balloon folded up in a heap, Moore's suddenly
changes his story to the neoprene maintaining its integrity for
several months. But he's clearly on record as saying otherwise
and quite recently too.

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

As recently as a year ago, at least. Connors photo is worth 10,000 words.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                          Secrecy News -- 01/29/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:34:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:36:22 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/29/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 10
January 29, 2002


**      A NEW TOOL FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACCESS TO INFORMATION
**      WHITE HOUSE SEEKS TO REVERSE "35 YEARS OF DECLINE"
**      NASA RESUMES RELEASE OF SHUTTLE MAPPING DATA

A NEW TOOL FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACCESS TO INFORMATION

While officials grapple over the proper boundaries of
Congressional oversight of executive branch activities, a
federal court has upheld the use of an unusual statutory
mechanism called the Seven Member Rule to compel agencies to
disclose certain types of information to Congress.

Last year, sixteen members of the House Government Reform
Committee sued the Bush Administration for access to census data
that the Administration did not want to release.

The lawsuit cited the Seven Member Rule, which is a 1928
statutory provision dictating that an agency must release
information if it is requested by seven members of the House
Government Reform Committee (or five members of the Senate
Governmental Affairs Committee) and concerns a matter under the
Committee's jurisdiction.  This provision had never before been
tested in court.

In a landmark January 18 decision, the Court found the Rule
valid and applicable, and ordered the requested data to be
disclosed.

Rep. Henry Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the Committee, hailed
the Court decision.  The Seven Member Rule could become "an
important tool for the public's right to know," Waxman told the
New York Times.

See the Court's ruling and related documentation here:

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/inves_other/other_census.htm

See also "Judge Allows Unusual Bid to Get Data from Census" by
David E. Rosenbaum in the January 26 New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/26/politics/26ACCE.html


WHITE HOUSE SEEKS TO REVERSE "35 YEARS OF DECLINE"

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday that the
Administration's refusal to disclose information requested by
the General Accounting Office concerning Enron and the Vice
President's Energy Task Force was a matter of high principle and
was intended to reverse decades of erosion in Presidential
power.

"I think it is to stop the decline of the power of the
presidency that have taken place the last 35 years or so,"
Fleischer told the Associated Press, echoing remarks made by
Vice President Cheney over the weekend.

But what was it that happened 35 years ago, years before
Watergate, that initiated this supposed decline in the power of
the Presidency?

The answer seems to be the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),
which was enacted about 35 years ago, in 1966.

By granting members of the public a legal right to public
information, the FOIA and related "sunshine" laws did in fact
diminish the power of the President to arbitrarily withhold
information and to evade public accountability.  Whether this is
a sign of decline or of political maturity is evidently a matter
of perspective.


NASA RESUMES RELEASE OF SHUTTLE MAPPING DATA

NASA this month resumed the public release of certain highly
precise digital mapping data collected by the Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM) in February 2000 following a
moratorium on disclosure late last year.

The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), which is an SRTM
co-sponsor, had ordered a halt to release of the digital maps
after September 11 due to security concerns, according to the
Washington Post (12/17/01).  The agency also withdrew certain
SRTM maps of U.S. military installations and other sensitive
locations from public access.

Release of the mapping data, which requires special application
software for viewing, recommenced earlier this month.  For
further information, see the SRTM homepage here:

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to majordomo@lists.fas.org with
this command in the body of the message:
subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                 Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 06:41:57 -0800 [???]
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:39:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight - McCoy


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:03:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight

Hello, all, Nick.


 >Below is a book mentioned in SPACE.COM which will be of interest
 >to those who wish to know about some of the unheralded people,
 >many of them Canadians, who made American manned spaceflight a
 >reality.

I've always held that the Canadian Aerospace Industry was second
to none for the reasons Nick stated. They also had a Government
openly hostile to any kind of forward thinking in Aerospace.

Don't feel bad so did the US and Great Britain, lost projects
galore due to idiots in the government agencies. One of the
reasons for the CF-105's demise is the foolish idea that the
manned fighter was passe' and that the Boeing Bomarc missile was
going to sweep Russian Bombers from the Northern Sky.

However,  the Bomarc turned out to be one of those cold war
projects that well, the only safe place was behind one and to
the right. Less than 100% reliable shall we say.

 >Canadians may have been among the earliest pioneers of manned
 >spaceflight of modern times but probably not the first. Just
 >today I learned from a Russian student with high level contacts
 >at the Korolev space research facility in Russia about several
 >failed attempts made by the Soviets in the 1950s to send humans
 >into space. What this student also told me was a very intriguing
 >account of a 1944 failed attempt by Nazi Germany to be the first
 >to send a man into space through the efforts of their rocket
 >scientists and engineers which, like the Canadians, eventually
 >ended up working for the U.S. (and the Soviet) space program.

I'd like to know more about this one. The Nazis had a manned V-1
that was supposed to be a suicide bomb like the Japanese "Baka"
piloted bomb. As I recall, the German female test pilot Hanna
Riesch flew the infernal thing, and one pilot (male) died in
testing. The V-2 Rocket didn't have enough suds for a manned
space shot, unless it was short of real space. However they did
have a whole lot of interesting ideas that never came about,
thank God.

 >What does all this have to do with UFOs you ask? Well, there is
 >an eccentric and very secrective individual west of Toronto who,
 >according to his friends, has an AVRO flying saucer among his
 >huge collection of aircraft and parts. This is not the disk
 >shaped AVRO Car that simply hovered but a secret one which could
 >fly to the edge of space and move at supersonic speeds just like
 >the newspapers claimed at the time. Many strange sightings of
 >extremely high altitude contrails created by something moving at
 >Mach 7 made by upper atmosphere scientists strongly suggests
 >that Canadian engineers may very well have been just as
 >successful with the AVRO Car (a later version shown flying in
 >space appears on a recent cover of 'Popular Mechanics') as they
 >were with the AVRO Arrow (and the Apollo Project).

Who knows?, there have been kooks and cranks with huge
collections of stuff, I knew an MD that, upon his death it was
discovered that he had  on his farm, every model of Ford sedan
made since 1919. this was 1978, and a collection of five
aircraft, Stinson, Piper, and Cessnas of various kinds. All of
this stuff was left to rot, but being eastern Washington's high
desert country, it didn't rot much.

Needless to say there was an interesting estate sale.

 ><snip>

 >* Featured Book: Arrows to the Moon: Avro's Engineers and the
 >Space Race

 >http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books/library_gainor_020125.html

 >On February 20, 1959, the Canadian government shut down the
 >CF-105 Avro Arrow jet interceptor program, putting the cream of
 >Canada's aerospace engineering talent out of work.

With it the demise of an aircraft that, even today would be nothing
to be ashamed of.


If it wasn't for idiots in high places, we'd be on Mars now trying to
figure out a way to get to Alpha Centauri.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 01:24:01 EST
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:43:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Gates



 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:33:40 -0600
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

<snip>

 >While we're at it, let me ask you this: How many people, in the
 >course of your Roswell investigations, have you talked to who
 >said that absolutely nothing unusual occurred during the dates
 >in question? This would include Kent Lorenzo and others. And how
 >many of those have made it into your writings on Roswell? Some?
 >A few? None?

 >If none, why not? After all, aren't they a legitimate part of
 >the Roswell story, too?

Dennis,

I still haven't figured out why you keep beating this particular
dead horse, i.e. why people who have nothing to say are somehow
important or meaningful in the picture of things. Using this
logic trail, if one was investigating a car accident we should
also talk to the people who didn't see anything, and or lived 20
miles away because somehow, some way what they have to say has
meaning and is important.

More to the point, using this logic trail, when an airplane
crashes the investigators should include the testimony of people
who don't know anything, didn't see anything, and can't
contribute anything meaningful to the investigation...I doubt
it.

Are these kind of people a legit part of the story? I seriously
doubt 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:27:37 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:46:34 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 13:03:19 -0500

 >>From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >>Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:01:26 -0600

 >>>From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Subject: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >>>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 21:36:38 -0500

 >>>9 UFOs Taped By Chilean Channel 13 Cameraman

 >>>Sunday January 27, 2002

 >>>Felipe Martinez was taping on assignment in Lota, Region VIII
 >>>of Chile when nine UFOs show up flying in formation at high
 >>>speed from south to north.

 >>Do we have any information on the date and time-of-day of the
 >>event?

 >>It's always helpful to check:

 >>http://www.satellite.eu.org/seesat/Jan-2002/index.html

 >>for satellite entries, especially when the description is
 >>multiple objects 'in formation'.

 >The day: Sunday January 27, 2002. No time-of-day given - only
 >during daytime.

 >Do we have satellites orbiting from the South to the North?
 >As far as I know, in that area, they fly from East to West.

 >Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
 >Miami UFO Center


Hello Virgilio:

Spy satellites routinely fly South to North and then North to
South again after they pass near one pole or the other.

Such orbits, with small adjustments, will eventually cover every
part of the Earth. Your standard tel-sats are generally on
equatorial orbits, and cover polar regions very poorly, or not
at all.

Lower orbits decay as they graze the upper reaches of the
atmosphere like spy sats often do. Launch motors (rockets)
almost always do, at least the first stages. These motors will
generally follow the same North South trajectories as their
payloads (spy sats), but at a lower altitude.

Once in a decay-mode, a satellite and/or launch rockets will
sometimes put on a magnificent display, depending upon time of
day etc. I saw a beauty once. It turned every color of the
rainbow in sequence. As it gracefully tumbled during burnout, it
apparently exposed one surface and then another to the plasma of
the ionosphere. A skeptical friend called me to point this out.
It took a good 20 minutes to cross the sky, from South to North
almost exactly.

I did not take the bait. I called back and indicated that I saw
a really neat space-junk burnout, but no UFOs.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                       Re: Manned Spaceflight - Young

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 04:05:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:47:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Manned Spaceflight - Young


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Canadians & Manned Spaceflight
 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:43:25 -0600

 >The story of a Nazi astronaut
 >on a V-2 is also evidently without foundation, perhaps based on
 >a highly distorted account of the death of a German pilot in a
 >special crew pod on a V-1 cruise missile (not built for space
 >flight).

 >Jim Oberg


James Oberg;

Here is one account of a female German pilot surviving a flight
on a V-1 rocket, from the Cincinnati Enquirer dated July 6,
1947. While this doesn't pertain to actual space flight she may
have been the first person to have 'The Right Stuff' (if
true...!) -- KY

-----------

"GIRL RODE V-1, LIVED TO TELL ALL, GERMANS AVOW"

Washington, July 5 - (UP) - Army Air Force officials disclosed
tonight that German scientists had informed them a German woman
pilot once rode a V-1 German buzz bomb, of the type used in the
bombardment of Britain, and lived.

American tests of the V-1 indicated that the German report
probably was true. The V-1 is powered by a ram jet engine and its
acceleration exerts pressure only seven to eight times that of
gravity on launching.

The Germans turned over to the U.S. Army authentic photographs of
the launching of a V-1 with a man aboard. This particular buzz
bomb, however, went out of control and crashed, the A.A.F.
reported.

A.A.F. scientists said the Germans were experimenting with a new
air weapon late in the World War II that might have broken up big
U.S. formation if it had been perfected in time. It consisted of
a huge RAM-jet engine with a small attached cockpit for a pilot.

The idea was to ram it into an approaching enemy formation and
break it up.

Fighters could then swarm in and finish the formation off,
according to the German plan.

The ram-jet pilot was supposed to parachute to safety after he
had done his damage.

End of article

--
"ELIMINATE CERTAINTY AND WATCH 'EM SQUIRM"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

              Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Hyvonen

From: Minna Hyv=F6nen <minna.hyvonen@kolumbus.fi>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 09:03:39 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:08:49 -0500
Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Hyvonen


 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 03:23:28 -0600

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:47:01 EST
 >>Subject: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >An interested lurker asked me to pass this along, Jimbo... seems
 >like good stuff to me.

 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 >The first order of business would be to make the proposed study
 >as "bullet-proof" as possible on the front end. (Before it
 >begins)


Alfred posted a good "memory-list" about things that should be
done. Also, I=B4ll write basing my opinions to a lay-man's
experience in a small country and to the discussion between UFO
researhers and sceptics here.

In discussions in Finland the same old stories are heard.
Sceptics claims, that the work of ufo-researchers lacks of many
things and because it the work of ufo- researchers is not
credential. Sceptics claims those lacks are:

a) Educational. There is very rare academical people among
finnish ufo-researchers. Like Albert brought up, the credential
of these researchers should be possible to check (I=B4m not saying
these folks aren=B4t credential-ones).

b)The lack of "the plan of research" (=3D freely translated).

Sceptics has told to the ufo-researchers in Finland, that there
should be a plan about the survey of people=B4s observations
and/or experiences they are gonna start. Without it the research
is not "(enough) scientific".

This plan should contain alot more than only an announcement
about the research just started. I guess you all know better
than me what this document is called in english, but to specify
what I=B4m trying to describe here is a list about some things it
should contain:

1) the reserach-problem

2) the issue of the research

3) plans how to fulfill this research (methods to research)

4) plans how to select the persons and researchers

5) list of researchers involving the project

6) how their credibility is varified

7) earlier publishments of the same study, if there
    is any

8) plans how long time is estimated to be needed to the research

9) evaluation of coming expenses, how much they are gonna be
    expenses in *each step* of the research, how the expenses are
    planned to find and how they are planned to use

10) plans how to publish the results

11) plans how to handle the results

This document is needed when the research is ment to be as
scientific as possible. This document is also an advertisment to
those who may get intrested to give some funding to this
research (like Mr. Bigelow and Mr. Rockefeller has done).


Minna 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 30

                  'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:23:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:23:32 -0500
Subject: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics?

http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/newscenter/weirdnews.html?qdate02-01-30&nav=VIEW&id
=8H19SR1031T020130


Wireless Flash Weird News - January 30, 2002

E.T.s Coordinating Spacecraft Fly-by At The Olympics?

PHOENIX (Wireless Flash) -- Next month's Winter Olympics in Salt
Lake City will be attracting all sorts of tourists -- including
E.T.

That's according to a Phoenix-based hypnotherapist who claims
she's been in contact with ETs all her life.

Victoria Liljenquist says her "space brothers" have told her
they plan to fly a cigar-shaped craft over thousands of Olympic
spectators on February 21, sometime between 12 p.m. and 5 p.m.,
weather permitting.

That's just around the same time as the gold medal round for the
women's curling event.

Liljenquist says the UFO appearance "won't be subtle" because ET
motherships are anywhere from 250 to 1000 miles long.

She says the ETs have chosen the Olympics to make their big
debut because it ensures a world wide audience will see
"undeniable proof of extraterrestrials' presence."


[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                           Filer's Files - 05 2002

From: George A. Filer <WeeklyFiles@filersfiles.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:40:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:38:59 -0500
Subject: Filer's Files - 05 2002


FILER'S FILES #05-2002 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
January 30, 2002, Majorstar@AOL.COM.
Webmaster Chuck Warren http://www.cewarren.com

UFOs were observed over Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia,
Louisiana, Arkansas, California, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Mexico, Brazil,
England and Italy A new UFO Museum opens in Ankara, Turkey.

ARKANSAS ABDUCTION

CARLYLE -- Paul S. wrote, I was abducted October 28.1999, on the
north side of the railroad bridge while boating in Carlyle. That
was my third known abduction that year. Two were from The Lake
of the Ozarks. I remember very little of the actual abduction,
but I was able to recall the position changes. It took some time
to figure out what happened and I am still remembering only bits
and pieces. I remember boating under the bridge near the
railroad embankment when I paused to open a map in order locate
the main channel. The next thing I remember is being one quarter
of a mile into the stumped filled northern section of the lake.
I was understandably confused and disorientated. I figured out
where I was with a map and compass, which is normally not needed
there. I then proceeded to explore and fish the area totally
forgetting the position change. I was reminded by what I think
is an unusual trigger using the GPS equipment in my boat. I
found a way to put my saved GPS trails on a computer map. When I
put the saved trail from that fishing trip on the map I got a
shock.

The trail went over the railroad embankment and back in a
rapidly moving narrow parabolic curve. Somehow the boat had to
be flying in the air. Then there is a gap and the spot the
trail starts again is the spot I remembered, "appearing" at.
When I saw the evidence, the memory of the position change came
back as if I had never forgotten it. The same thing occurred at
the second Lake of the Ozarks abduction. I went to a therapist
in St. Louis and in eleven sessions was able to get no further.
I kept blocking up when I got to the point of the abductions. I
do have a memory of a gray alien and a structure on the craft.
I have some other mental pictures, but I am not sure of them.
Predictably I began to remember some things from my childhood
that indicates a possible history of these things. I have been
writing a narrative of the events as I recall them with my
opinions and thoughts on it. It seems to be good therapy. I
seem to be affected less than many abductees. Thanks to Paul S.

Editor's Note -- I encourage abduction reports particularly
when some evidence such as this Global Positioning System (GPS)
tracking is found. The GPS system provides accurate time and
location within fifteen feet giving credibility to an alleged
abduction. In recent years the science as made amazing strides
and interest in abductions has been hurt by the lack of
supporting evidence. Here is a case that provides some key
evidence. For a thousand dollars anyone can put a satellite
tracking system into their vehicle that is about the size of a
pound of margarine. The only way this tracking data could have
occurred is with a hovering craft.

NEW HAMPSHIRE UFO SIGHTINGS NOT YET IDENTIFIED

FREMONT - Unidentified flying objects are not unusual in
Rockingham County. At an increasing pace over the last decade,
UFOs have been sighted performing a gymnast's repertoire of
aerial maneuvers. The Web site www.ufopage.com lists 33
documented sightings since 1995. On January 24, 2002, New
Hampshire may have been visited again. At 10:04 p.m. Fremont
Police Officer H.D. Wood was dispatched to Main Street to
investigate a report of two objects hovering silently in the
air. The objects were described as "bright and full of lights,"
according to the police report. Wood had been on these calls
before, though his department lacks any protocol to follow and
the police academy does not train cadets for these situations.
"Quite frankly, I don't believe we have a policy as to how to
handle this kind of thing," Wood said. "I guess it's common
sense, really." Wood said the witness was describing the
actions of the UFOs, as he was en route. The witness described
the objects as hovering silently in the air. The larger of the
two objects flew south toward Sandown. The smaller object flew
north toward Brentwood. They were gone when Wood, assisted by a
Brentwood police officer, pulled up. "We arrived on the scene
and (the witness) said, 'I'm not crazy. I'm not on drugs,'"
Wood recalled. He said the witness and the witness's wife and
daughter all saw the objects. The witness claimed a passing
motorist also saw the event but didn't stop. Wood investigated
the area, saw no evidence the snow had been disturbed and wrote
his report. Without other witnesses or any physical indication
of a visitation, Wood said he considers the case closed. "In my
mind, if it's substantiated, you call the FAA to see if there
are any reports of aircraft in the area," Wood said. "Then you
call other dispatch centers to see if they've gotten calls,
because what happens is, if something is sighted, everyone is
going to call." Wood said his first reaction when he received
the call was to seek background on the caller. "To be honest,
when I did get the call I did pull up my laptop to see if we'd
had any previous contact at this address," Wood said. He
describes himself as a skeptic, but said he absolutely believes
the witness did see something. "I was skeptical at first," he
said. "Then I listened to the person discuss the issue and they
were very adamant that they saw something."

Fremont Police Chief Neal Janvrin was an officer with the
Exeter Police Department on Sept. 3, 1965, the day of New
Hampshire's most notorious UFO sighting, an incident that
became the subject of a book, "Incident at Exeter." That day
would be a significant date in history for believers in alien
visitations. It is rare that a police officer can substantiate
a sighting, but on this day two of Janvrin's fellow officers,
Dave Hunt, and Gene Bertrand, as well as many civilians, would
report seeing a large, elliptical object with red lights around
it. The object reportedly moved between houses and trees while
the lights blinked in sequence. Janvrin said he's been on UFO
calls before, but he's never seen a UFO himself. Janvrin said
the only thing an officer can do is take a report. "Obviously,
if we get there and we see something we would try and
photograph it," he said. "If there was some sign of disturbance
we would record it." Janvrin said he doesn't consider himself a
non-believer, but does not have enough evidence to say he is a
believer. "You look up in the sky, you see all the suns, and
every sun has so many planets I guess the possibility does
exist. We're on this planet," he said. He added that Hunt and
Bertrand's experience gives him pause to reconsider. "They were
two guys who I worked with and I trusted," Janvrin said. Thanks
to: Rockingham News, Plaistow / NH. Published: Jan 25.02
Byline: Jeff Kaplan and Farshores. FarShores UFO News -
www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/index.htm

PENNSYLVANIA THREE UFOs FILMED

WILKES-BARRE -- Ron Hannivig reports that photos have been
taken somewhere over the Wilkes-Barre area of three UFOs. These
are excellent photos however, as the old adage goes "if it's
too good to be true it probably ain't." My best interpretation
of the photos was that the UFOs appear to be ceramic in
composition. They might well be a boniface and properly
documented sighting of three UFOs - and I will/we will try to
track down the source to find out if it could be credible, or
not. Thanks to RonHannivig, Simpson, PA

MARYLAND FLUORESCENT GREEN BLUE CENTERED EGG SHAPED OBJECT

BEL AIR -- As the witnesses were driving south on Tollgate Road
on January 7, 2002, they saw a bright fluorescent green colored
glowing egg shaped object with a faint blue center. It was
traveling from northeast to southwest it seamed to suddenly
drop from the sky and followed a path that started high and
decreased lower in the sky even though when the object did
disappear it was still very high but lower from where it
started. We listened for an explosion like fireworks, but we
heard or saw nothing. We figured it could not have been a
meteor because the object would have been white, red, or yellow
and it would have not followed a curved arc shaped path. The
object from our car window was very large and it was traveling
at an extremely fast pace, like a falling star. The object had
a faint blue center surrounded in green. There was no tail. You
could definitely see a blue dot in the center of the object and
you could notice where the objects edges were. When the object
disappeared it was going very fast and was still very high
above the horizon. It disappeared instantly with no explosion,
sound, or change of shape or color.

BALTIMORE -- At the same time witnesses saw a streaking white
light that turned blue and accelerated at incredible speed. The
witness says, "I noticed a streaking white light similar to a
"shooting star" but two or three times larger. The light
suddenly turned into a blue light that was even larger and then
accelerated forward at an incredible rate and was no longer
visible." Peter B. Davenport, Director National UFO Reporting
Center www.nuforc.com

VIRGINIA GREEN FIREBALL VAPOR CAME ACROSS THE SKY AT SPEED

NEW KENT -- The witness was driving home from work east on
Interstate 64 on January 11, 2001, when his friend said,
"Look!" He looked and saw a fluorescent bright green vapor like
craft at 5:45 PM. It moved from north to south very fast faster
than any airplane could possibly travel. When it reached the
road it turned in a southern direction. With a great burst of
speed it shot off into the sky and in one or two seconds it
completely disappeared. We could see the light (vapor) go from
large green mass to a tiny flash as it disappeared. There was
no sound. It looked like something you would see on Star Wars
or something. I have never experienced like this before but
this was definitely a UFO! As it was going away from us toward
the south, traveling as fast as light. The weather was as clear
as a bell. This was real.

RICHMOND -- A green fireball traveling from the WNW to ESE on
January 7, 2002. The sighting lasted about two seconds at
17:43. The interesting thing is that the cloud cover was thick
and fairly low. The fireball appeared to be just inside the
clouds. The location of the sighting was driving into the
parking lot of the Tuckahoe YMCA on Patterson Avenue. Another
witness states, "I was in parking lot at Midlothian Turnpike
and a colored light flew by at 5:45 PM It was a beautiful
bluish green and very bright moving at a steady rate of speed
with no sound. My coworker Alice W., was stopped at the light
at 5:45 PM, at Hull Street and Hicks Road when she saw a fast
moving bluish light higher than the treetops. It was moving
much faster and lower than an airplane. She also saw a second
stationary bluish light off to the right. Her description
matches mine. Thanks to Peter B. Davenport, Director National
UFO Reporting Center www.nuforc.com

WEST VIRGINIA USAF JETS BELIEVED TO HAVE SHOT AT UFO's IN
1950'S.

PINEVILLE -- The witness reports that he was living between the
towns of Pineville and Mullens in July of 1957 and one day my
father and older sister saw was a space capsules of some sort
being chased by three or four USAF jet aircraft. I was a tot at
the time and did not understand what was going on. The Air
Force jets shot these UFO's out of the sky around 1:00 PM, or
else they were shooting at them and drove them away. This leads
me to believe that there could perhaps have been many
encounters that our government has had with UFO's through the
years and have shot them down for national security purposes. I
do not know the exact date of this, but I believe it to be in
the summer sometime between 1955 and 1957. My dad has since
died but every now and again my sister mentions this sighting.
Neither of the two made a big issue out of this or reported it
to anyone. I can attest they are both people of integrity and
would have never made up the story. It is still a very real
incident in the mind of my oldest sister to this day. Truth
sticks in a person's mind forever, falsehoods soon fade in the
passing of time.

GEORGIA WHITE ROUND SPINNING OBJECT FLASHING WHITE, RED, GREEN
LIGHTS.

The witness reports that on January 9, 2002, the UFO hovered
and did not move for two hours. At 3:00 AM, in only ten minutes
it flew behind the tree line and was gone. It was a round very
bright blinking light that was brighter than the northern star.
With binoculars you could see it had flashing white, red, and
green lights.

Walter Sheets MUFON State Director reports that sightings have
been relatively quiet as far as incoming Georgia reports go for
2002. I would like to mention again that the short trend of
noncooperative witnesses continued through the end of 2001,
with another that filed an initial report, but failed to do a
sit-down with our personnel to make it 'official.' This type of
thing happens -- just wish it would happen somewhere else! I
particularly dislike the way some witnesses have acted --
standing up our personnel, not returning phone calls etc. Of
course, with persons acting like that, their reports would
probably not have stood up to our first hand scrutiny anyway.

We did receive one older unusual report via WUFOD, that during
October of 1997, a Jefferson Georgia couple arrived home one
night at about 10:00 PM. They turned into their driveway and
noticed a red glow eight feet away from their front door in the
yard and six feet off of the ground. Upon closer examination,
the red glow was the intensity of a red Christmas light, and
about the size of softball. It hovered as the witnesses drove
to the end of the driveway and began to observe for several
minutes. They noticed that their three outdoor dogs were
sitting in a small circle underneath the glowing ball. The 45
pound dogs appeared to be nervously happy, stretching their
necks upward and excited. They would not break their sitting
position, and were only intent upon looking up at the glow. The
dogs were normally frisky types that would go after something
aggressively, but not that night. It was almost like the
glowing ball was 'talking' to their dogs, making them happy
while they sat underneath in the circle. The Mrs. finally
walked toward the glow with her husband unsure about the wisdom
in that. She said that she would have reached out to grab at
it, but that it moved upwards to about 25 feet and then blinked
out as she approached. She felt the round ball was still there
even after it blinked out at 25 feet due to the dogs continued
conduct. After failing to relocate the ball of light, they went
on about their evening activities. About ten minutes later, her
husband went out back to feed the animals. He called them, then
once again observed the red ball of light as it flew over the
house into the backyard. It continued into an adjacent field
for about 500 feet and landed in the field and then once again
went out, vanishing for good. These are excellent witnesses.

On April 25, 1998, about six months later, a report of a red
glow in the shape of a thin straight line, hovering, then
moving at incredible speed, was reported in Comer, by a
University of Georgia student, majoring in physics, See ISUR
File #100132, and MUFONGA@webtv.net. Thanks to Tom Sheets.

ILLINOIS ORANGE LIGHTS

NORTH OF FREEPORT IN STEPHENSON CO. -- On January 9, 2002, the
witness reports, "I was driving north on a country road and
looked over to my right at 7:00 PM, and just above the horizon
were three orangish/white lights." They weren't blinking and
seemed to be still. I turned right on the next road keeping my
eye on them the best that I could. After I turned the one
blinked out and the two remained. They were so close and bright
it seemed I could easily catch up to them and see what they
were for sure. No matter how fast I drove I couldn't get close.
I noticed the one up ahead of me looking as if it was going to
cross over the road ahead of me, so I thought I'd be able to
see it just over the next hill because it was a clear view for
miles around. Well, I get over the hill and it was gone. I then
saw them over Rockford, so I gave up my chase and came home.
Thanks to Peter B. Davenport, Director National UFO Reporting
Center www.nuforc.com

LOUISIANA

ALEXANDRIA -- On Monday, January 14, 2002, Sondra Coaker
observed a succession of four white lights blinking on starting
from the left at 7:15 PM, going to the right, and then blinking
off from the right to the left. This was done three times
southwest over the city, These lights were very bright and when
one would light up the others followed in succession and went
out in succession. They were lined up in an angle at 45 degrees
high. Thanks to Sondra Coaker moonreapr@cox-internet.com


ARIZONA FLYING TRIANGLE AND WHITE OBJECT STREAKS ACROSS SKY,
EXPLODES

FOUNTAIN HILLS -- At precisely 3:00 AM, the witness saw a
bright light in my front yard on January 10, 2002. He looked
out his window and saw a triangular craft hovering over the
street with red and yellow lights moving around the shape of
the craft. I watched it for approximately fifteen seconds and
went outside to investigate. I walked up the spiral staircase
to our roof but it had already left. I stayed on the roof for
about ten minutes and saw a little flash as if something was
leaving our atmosphere.

PHOENIX -- On January 10, 2002, the witness was driving south
on Litchfield Road in Avondale area of Phoenix at 9:30 PM, when
he saw an extremely bright object burning bluish white
streaking across the night sky. The object appeared to be
headed in a southwestern direction when it appeared to me in
the left peripheral area of my sight. The witness pointed and
shouted out excitedly to his 8 year old daughter. The witness
states, "Then the object seemed to explode into an orange and
red ball of flame then blinked out. A moment later it flared up
again directly below the point I had last seen it and was
falling toward the ground and no longer streaking across the
horizon as before," he said. Then it burned completely out just
before reaching the horizon. Before and after the orange-red
blast, the object was burning so brightly that it cast a faint
blue hue on the horizon, lighting up everything in sight. It
also had a burning white tail that trailed behind it.

CHANDLER -- Twenty minutes later, another witness was driving
south on Route 101 between Ray and Chandler Boulevard at 9:50
PM. A defining green cylinder shaped object flew overhead and
skimmed diagonally through the sky at a high rate of speed much
like a shooting star. The only possible thing I could have
mistaken this for is a meteor. However, it was a definite color
of bright green and had a defining shape of a cylinder. It did
not resemble a shooting star or a meteor in the way that they
both appear to have tails as they shoot through the sky. This
did not, it flew through the sky like a perfect and very fast
craft. Thanks to Peter B. Davenport, Director NUFORC
www.nuforc.com

HAWAII TWO ROUND WHITE LIGHTS MOVING

KAPULA BAY, MAUI -- The witnesses were out whale watching on
Kapalua Bay on January 9, 2002, when two round lights appeared
in the middle of the Bay at 7:50 AM. At first, they thought it
was a boat as it started to move across the water, but the two
lights moved together very smoothly, and started flying so they
thought it was a plane flying very close to the water. As it
moved steadily across the Bay the witness ran to get his
binoculars. The two lights move from right to left. The witness
states, "With the binoculars I still could not see anything but
two round lights, there was not any craft or any kind of mass
around the lights." If it had been a plane, the object would
have had to be coming in our direction. As the objects reached
towards the shore on the left of the Bay they rose like a
plane, then disappeared. At this point they were going away
from our direction and they were still two rounds lights. If it
had been a plane there would not have been two round lights
because of the direction they were going. All of this took only
two minutes. It was a beautiful clear morning and many tourists
go out whale watching. It puzzled me and I could not could not
come up with a reasonable explanation for these lights. Thanks
to Peter B. Davenport, NUFORC www.nuforc.com

MEXICO UFO SIGHTING

MERIDA, YUCATAN -- On January 22, 2002, at 3:05 PM David
Antonio Triay Lucatero reports sighting ah elongated discoidal
shaped, silvery-white in color for 20 seconds. I was standing
outside, looking at the sky to the north, when I saw a
discoidal object emerge from a small cloud at an altitude some
30 degrees over the horizon. It moved from west to east at high
speed, making a small curve toward the southwest and then
returning to a northwest heading. Its movements appeared to be
intelligently guided; when I calculated that it heading lead it
toward a cloudless area, I ran into my house to fetch some 16 x
50 binoculars and an Olympus f=50mm camera. This one-minute
delay in returning to the place where the sighting occurred
meant that the object had already vanished from sight. No trace
of it was found after scanning the sky with binoculars,
stressing the fact that its heading took it toward a part of
the sky that was free of clouds. The sky had scattered clouds
at 764 meters (2500 ft), wind was blowing ESE at 29.0 km/h (18
mph) the object left no wake in its path. It could be seen as
having a metallic volume (sic). It could be said that the
object's size was about 1/4th that of the waxing Moon when seen
to the east. Translation (C) 2001. Scott Corrales, Institute of
Hispanic Ufology. Special Thanks to Ing. David Triay Lucatero,
Grupo CAFE, and Louise A. Lowry SHnSASSY1,
http://www.ufoxfiles.com/WorldOfTheStrange/default.asp.

BRAZIL STRANGE LIGHT

CALAMA --There was a one-of-a-kind break in the morning routine
of some workers and residents of the El Loa region who saw an
enigmatic static and cylindrical light. Reports place the event
at around 7:30 hours to the west of Cerro La Cruz. According to
eyewitness accounts, the distance did not allow for a detailed
view of the light, therefore it could fairly be described as an
unidentified flying object or UFO. "The fact is that I don't
know what it really was, it could have been a weather balloon
or something else, I don't know, but it looked very strange,"
said a resident who was heading toward Chuquicamata at that
time of day. When consulted about this event, the authorities
of the Office of Civil Aeronautics of Antofagasta and Calama
pointed out that their instruments picked up nothing at the
time in question. "Generally people notify us when sightings of
this kind take place, but this time we received no reports of
anything similar," explained Renzi Jara, manager of the El Loa
Airport. Translation (C) 2002. Scott Corrales, Institute of
Hispanic Ufology. Special Thanks to Jaime Ferrer, Calama UFO
Center

ENGLAND YELLOW EGG SHAPED OBJECT

RICHMOND, NORTH YORKSHIRE-- The witness reports that on January
3, 2002, an unidentified object approached diagonally from the
south at 150 mph. It was a 100 feet long yellow egg shaped
object about 50 feet tall with a blue light being emitted from
beneath. It stopped at 4.00 PM, and hovered ten feet above the
field next to the golf course for about 25seconds. As the
object hovered above the field we could see at least ten sheep
in the field. The object appeared to be hovering above a sheep
which didn't seem to be afraid. It wasn't moving much at all.
Then the sheep simply disappeared into thin air. This is when
the Object left at an incredible rate which was then followed
by a sonic boom. It departed at approximately 300 m/s. in a
vertical direction. After we had gathered our selves we went
straight to the farmer who confirmed that one of his sheep was
missing. Please contact us soon as we have been held
responsible for the sheep disappearance as the farmer thinks we
have played a practical joke on him. Thanks to
Fatcash90@hotmail.com.

ITALIAN UFO NEWSFLASH ISSUE NO. 340 - The Italian Center for
UFO Studies (Centro Italiano Studi Ufologici, CISU) there were
630 Italian sightings during 2001 As already and duly
evidenced, 2001 saw a veritable wave of UFO sightings in Italy,
with a doubling in the number of reports with respect to the
media over previous years. The wave was centered around the
summer months with more than two-thirds of the cases. August
was the most popular month during this wave, the other Italian
waves tend to occur during the autumn. The monthly lists of
cases have already been accessible for some time on the
Internet Website of the C.I.S.U., at URL
http://www.arpnet.it/ufo/casi0101.htm Thanks to the Italian
Center for Ufological Studies

TURKEY FIRST INTERNATIONAL U F O MUSEUM EASTERN EUROPE

ISTANBUL --"The First International UFO Museum of Middle and
Eastern Europe, Balkans and Middle-East" has opened in Istanbul
on January 18, 2002. The news of this grand opening has been
broadcast in many national TV channels including CNN Turk, NTV,
Kanal D, Star, ATV, BRT, TV8..etc and publicised by many
leading national newspapers such as Hurriyet, Milliyet, Star,
etc...Even the Russian television mentioned the opening in
evening news. The museum is located right at the center of the
10 million populated city of Istanbul which connects the two
continents of Asia and Europe. The aim of this project is to
inform not only the Turkish citizens but also millions of
tourists coming to Istanbul from all over the world, about the
UFO phenomenon. Our main goal is to serve people coming from
every country presenting them the proof of the UFO & E.T
phenomenon. The project has been supported by the data and
archives of hundreds of associations and institutions
worldwide, which are conducting scientific research on this
subject.

NEW UFO STORE IS NOW OPEN

The new UFO Store is open on our web site with some of the best
UFO books and paraphernalia available. Help support UFO
research by purchasing through us! Filer's Files is dedicated
to uncovering the truth about UFOs and has sent them out free
since January 1997. Your support is needed to cover expenses,
and when you shop in our store, you get the satisfaction of
quality products, with the knowledge that you have helped
support the search for the truth. Come help our adventure,
while supporting UFO research! Order online today, at
http://www.filersfiles.com/ufostore/index.htm

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new hour-long tape of UFOs
filmed on recent Shuttle video footage 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. I feel confident we
could go into a court of law and convince any jury that there
are UFOs moving at high speed around the Earth. Send $25 to:
Jeff Challender 2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento, California
95833-2011

MAILINGLIST / NEWSLETTER PROGRAMS

Today we would like to let you know where you can find one of
the finest mailinglist / newsletter programs on the Internet
which we ourselves use. Boost your business with one of the
finest email-marketing and customer support software products
available! WWW.ULICES.COM GO AND SEE A FULL WORKING DEMOS at
http://www.ulices.com. A strong support team supports you FREE
of charge. Enjoy great marketing products and professional
service! YOUR SUCCESS IS JUST ONE CLICK AWAY! Find a great
affiliate program and earn cash! Earn up to $15.00 for every
successful sales link to us. Earn a 15% commission on every
product sold. Sign up is quick & easy: 2 simple steps. Start
business in 5 minutes. NO FEES, NO OBLIGATIONS, NO SERVICING,
NO RISK! For information just check out their affiliates
program at: http://www.ulices.com/resellers.htm

MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative
reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL that costs only $35 per
year by contacting MUFONHQ@aol.com. Mention that I recommended
you for membership. Filer's Files is copyrighted 2002 by George
A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the complete
files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its
editor by name and list the date of issue that the item
appeared. 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. Caution,
most of these are initial reports and require further
investigation.

Regards, George Filer












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

              Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Gevaerd

From: A. J. Gevaerd <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 10:58:16 -0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:47:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Gevaerd


 >From: Minna Hyv=F6nen <minna.hyvonen@kolumbus.fi>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Hyvonen
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 09:03:39 +0200

 >In discussions in Finland the same old stories are heard.
 >Sceptics claims, that the work of ufo-researchers lacks of many
 >things and because it the work of ufo- researchers is not
 >credential. Sceptics claims those lacks are:

 >a) Educational. There is very rare academical people among
 >finnish ufo-researchers. Like Albert brought up, the credential
 >of these researchers should be possible to check (I=B4m not saying
 >these folks aren=B4t credential-ones).

Minna, the situation is exactly the same in Brazil, where
sceptics also claim that most people involved in UFO research
have no academical education background. But the problem is that
these same sceptics, who have academical education background,
don't engage themselves in UFO research. They rather criticize
who does UFO research than take the innitiative of doing so.

On other hand, contrary to what one could expect, we have found
in Brazil very good researches and field investigations coming
from people who don't have any academical education background.
It looks like that passion and dedication to Ufology have turned
simple people into good and accurate researchers.


A. J. Gevaerd
Brazilian UFO Magazine








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                  Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Boreham

From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 15:16:38 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:50:27 -0500
Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Boreham


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:51:42 -0700
 >From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:56:38 CST
 >>Subject: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB

 >>It gets stranger and stranger.

 >>So far in 2002, we have 3 (three) Hollywood movies, either out
 >>already or soon to be released, which feature Men In Black as
 >>significant characters.

 ><snip>

 >Maybe they are trying to desensitize the general public to their
 >appearance and presence?!


You'd have thought the public would already be desensitized by
now. The MIB stories have been about for years.
Or are we in for another "this is the year" (the aliens make
themselves known).

If i had a penny..... ;-)


Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                 Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Hamilton

From: Bill Hamilton <skywatcher22@space.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:30:10 -0800 (PST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:52:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Hamilton


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:15:45 +0000
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology - Clark
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 12:52:34 -0600

 >>>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:21:30 +0000
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Keel About 'Current' Ufology

 >>>But how about this for purple prose - can you guess who wrote
 >>>it?

 >>>"...John A. Keel, a veteran critic of ETH whose work we have
 >>>long admired... Keel has probably spent more time in the field
 >>>than any other private researcher. This fact has afforded him
 >>>the opportunity to view the UFO mystery from the inside, and not
 >>>from the distorted perspective of most UFO literature, written
 >>>usually to enhance belief in interplanetary visitors, which
 >>>blithely ignores the evidence inconsiderate enough not to fit
 >>>the author's preconceptions."

 >>Without checking, I'd say this looks like something I could have
 >>written, and probably did write, 25 to 35 years ago (otherwise,
 >>why would you be citing it?). I can go you one better: Loren
 >>Coleman and I actually dedicated our book Creatures of the Outer
 >>Edge (written in 1975, published in 1978) to Keel. As I have
 >>never made a secret (see, most recently, my article in the next
 >>issue of Fortean Times), I once thought John was a cool guy with
 >>great ideas. Eventually, of course, as my intellect and
 >>understanding evolved, I changed my mind.

 >>Speaking of which, John, when was the last time _you_ changed
 >>your mind about anything ufological in the past 25 to 35 years?
 >>As far as I can tell, your psychosocial obsession has been
 >>locked in concrete for as long as I can remember.

 >I have changed my views quite considerably over the past 25 - 30
 >years. At one time I was attracted all sorts of 'occult' ideas
 >to explain UFOs.

 >Unfortunately my change has been in the direction of greater
 >scepticism. The more I learned about UFOs and the people who
 >study them, the more I realised that there was no need to invoke
 >unknown forces to explain UFOs. As even from the beginning I was
 >never a particular fan of the ETH you probably haven't noticed.

I do not understand how anyone who has studied this phenomena or
has witnessed UFO appearance and behavior can come to the
conclusion that we do not need to invoke unknown forces to
explain UFOs.

First, how does one explain one unknown in terms of another
unknown? Through a process of analysis, hypothesis formation,
elimination of hypotheses by contradiction to fact, further
collection of data, peer review, conjectures and more hypotheses
it seems that for those UFOs that have not been identified, an
unknown origin and an unknown guiding intelligence remain as a
persisting enigma.

As for the ETH - it is one of a number of competing hypotheses
and is still a front runner when it comes to CE-2 and CE-3 type
cases in my opinion. The standard rejoinder that the speed of
light imposes a limitation on interstellar space travel is not a
valid restriction if spacecraft velocities are close to the "c"
limit due to time dilation. Certain physicists are now
considering theoretical and practical methods to achieve rapid
transit to the stars including tunneling through the Cosmic
neighborhood. Actually, all that is necessary is that ETs
establish bases of operation within the solar system and on
earth and make daily trips around the planet to be seen in such
numbers.

There are extradimensional hypotheses as well, but not as
clearly developed as the ETH. It is possible that multiple
origins account for UFO sightings.


-Bill Hamilton
Skywatch International








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

               Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? -

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 09:00:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:54:48 -0500
Subject: Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? -


From: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers 2 - : ;>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 6:23 AM
Subject: UFO UpDate: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics?


 >Source: downtoearth.com

http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/newscenter/weirdnews.html?qdate02-01-30&nav=VIEW&id
=8H19SR1031T020130

 >Wireless Flash Weird News - January 30, 2002

 >E.T.s Coordinating Spacecraft Fly-by At The Olympics?

 >PHOENIX (Wireless Flash) -- Next month's Winter Olympics in Salt
 >Lake City will be attracting all sorts of tourists -- including
 >E.T.

 >That's according to a Phoenix-based hypnotherapist who claims
 >she's been in contact with ETs all her life.

 >Victoria Liljenquist says her "space brothers" have told her
 >they plan to fly a cigar-shaped craft over thousands of Olympic
 >spectators on February 21, sometime between 12 p.m. and 5 p.m.,
 >weather permitting.

 >That's just around the same time as the gold medal round for the
 >women's curling event.

 >Liljenquist says the UFO appearance "won't be subtle" because ET
 >motherships are anywhere from 250 to 1000 miles long.

 >She says the ETs have chosen the Olympics to make their big
 >debut because it ensures a world wide audience will see
 >"undeniable proof of extraterrestrials' presence."

 >[UFO UpDates thanks www.anomalist.com for the lead]

This is very interesting. I am here in Salt Lake City and I
wasn't looking forward to the crowds of people and hordes of
cars for the Olympics. So, I guess I will look to the heavens
for my entertainment. Or should I look down?

Jean M.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                                Manned V-1's

From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@northropgrumman.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:26:14 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:58:33 -0500
Subject: Manned V-1's


Errol, list:

The Germans never intended to developed 'Kamakazi' V-1's. That
kind of thing wasn't in their culture. The manned V-1s were
intended to find out why the unmanned ones kept crashing before
they were supposed to. Worked, too.


Steven








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                      V-1 'Buzz Bombs' & Hanna Reistch

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 11:23:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:01:54 -0500
Subject: V-1 'Buzz Bombs' & Hanna Reistch


Hello all,

The story of Hanna Reistch and the V-1 manned Buzz Bomb:

http://www.spaceline.org/history/4.html

if you peruse the whole story you'l find that the V-1 had some
severe limitations. It Includes some pithy commets From Ms.
Reistch herself.

Hanna Reistch had several firsts under her belt - including the
First Indoor helicopter flight with a Focke-Wulf Helicopter.
She was a member of the International Test Pilots Society. (I
think I got that right) anyway see below.

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:16:44 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:09:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Rudiak


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:43:33 -0800 (PST)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >Perhaps - if Mogul is indeed the correct interpretation - Ramey
 >didn't feel it was at all necessary to litter every corner of
 >his office with balloon debris to get the point across to the
 >press. The solitary shredded Rawin we see in the photos may have
 >been a representative sampling.

The problem with this is that the Rawin doesn't represent merely
a "representative sampling." In a random sampling of multiple
shredded targets, you would expect all sorts of odds and ends
from those multiple targets. But that isn't what is present.
What you have are virtually all the pieces to assemble exactly
one target, and not one shred more.

For example, the ML307 radar target consisted of six(6) core
framework sticks 2' long. Surrounding the core were nine (9)
diagonal sticks 2'10" long. It is possible to account for all 6
core sticks and 8 of the 9 diagonal sticks.

Furthermore, two of the diagonal sticks are broken. In a random
sampling, you would not expect to necessarily find the matching
pieces. But you do here. There are four broken pieces, which can
be paired up into two sets of mating broken pieces adding up to
the length of the expected diagonal sticks.

Here's another interesting detail. The two sticks are broken in
almost exactly the same place. I would not give that a lot of
probability of happening by chance. Instead, what it looks like
is somebody deciding to bust the target up a little more for
effect, grabs two sticks side by side, and breaks them both
simultaneously over his knee, or snaps them in his hands. Voila
-- two pieces broken in the same place.

Then there are the triangular foil/paper pieces making up the
target. The targets were made of 4 large triangles and 1 smaller
one. The photos show 4 larger triangles and 1 smaller one.

Let's go back to Mack Brazel's Roswell Daily Record interview.
He claimed to have gathered _all_ the sticks, foil, and paper
making up the radar targets into _one_ bundle. The radar targets
from a Mogul should have come down altogether and shredded
together. When Brazel gathered these up, there should have been
a random mix of target pieces in his bundle.

But the debris in Fort Worth instead shows almost exactly one
radar target. To believe that this originally came from multiple
targets, one further has to hypothesize that the intelligence
officers sorted through this debris and basically reassembled
one complete target for display, even bothering to match up the
broken pieces and doing a careful count of parts to make sure it
all added up right. They were very careful not to have even one
extra 2' stick or one extra foil panel.

How likely do you think this scenario is? Why would they bother
to reassemble a radar target? These were the same guys who
supposedly didn't even know what a radar target was.

Surely your hypothetical representative sampling would have been
more than adequate. Nobody could have told the difference, nor
would it have mattered.

Your scenario also doesn't account for the seemingly excellent
condition of the balloon on display, not a balloon that has lain
out for month in the N.M. sun. That would have been in shreds.

Then there are the dogs that didn't bark. Instead of being dirty
and stained, the white paper backing on the target is a uniform,
bright white. One doesn't expect that from a radar target that
has been dragged through the dirt to shred it and then exposed
to the elements for a month.

Another mute dog was the tied-on suspension twine missing from
the target. How did it untie itself? In fact, nobody mentioned
the presence of the hundreds of feet of twine that should have
been at a Mogul crash site. Mack Brazel specifically denied
finding any.

Brazel also denied finding any payload equipment (as did Marcel,
Cavitt, and Ramey). Yet that should have come down with the
Rawins and the hypothetical paper parachuites and been at the
same crash site.

The paper parachutes were supposed to account for Marcel's
description of large quantitities of parchment-like material.
But where is it in the Fort Worth photos? Surely, this would be
very innocuous stuff and part of Brazel's one bundle of sticks,
foil, paper, etc. You would expect at least one or two pieces
from those parachutes along with the Rawin material in that
representative sampling. But it is nowhere to be seen.

 >I'm not suggesting that a single Rawin was what crashed at the
 >Foster ranch. But if the debris was terrestrial and extensive,
 >as indicated by Marcel, why bother lugging the entirety of it to
 >Carswell? A "sample" would do nicely for PR purposes.

The point is, the debris is not the sort of sample you would
expect from the crash and shredding of multiple objects (Rawins,
parachutes) all mixed together in Mack Brazel's bundle. It is
not a random sample. It is instead a singular, maybe complete,
broken up radar target, and not one item more.

If this was from a Mogul crash, it is nearly impossible to
account for without magical thinking. On the other hand, if it
was a fresh radar target brought in from somewhere and busted up
for a photo op, then all the properties of the debris on display
are _easily_ accounted for. Occam's razor would definitely favor
the latter theory.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                         Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:34:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:11:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Stacy


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 01:24:01 EST
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

<snip>

 >Dennis,

 >I still haven't figured out why you keep beating this particular
 >dead horse, i.e. why people who have nothing to say are somehow
 >important or meaningful in the picture of things. Using this
 >logic trail, if one was investigating a car accident we should
 >also talk to the people who didn't see anything, and or lived 20
 >miles away because somehow, some way what they have to say has
 >meaning and is important.

 >More to the point, using this logic trail, when an airplane
 >crashes the investigators should include the testimony of people
 >who don't know anything, didn't see anything, and can't
 >contribute anything meaningful to the investigation...I doubt
 >it.

 >Are these kind of people a legit part of the story? I seriously
 >doubt it.


Robert,

First off, let me thank you for carrying on a civil discourse.

This issue goes back to which "Roswell" we're talking about.
Let's assume, for argument's sake, that it's one of the big ones
in which a sizeable number of personnel were involved in the
recovery and clean up effort, the civilian fire department was
brought in, there were at least two crash sites, and bodies were
autopsied on base.

It's a tenet of mainstream journalism and investigative
reporting that you get both sides of the story, or three or
four, if there are that many. When I wrote regularly for Omni
magazine, I knew not to submit a story that didn't have at least
two points of view. Because if I did, I knew it was coming back
for revision.

Sometimes the other side of a particular story is a
straightforward "I was there at the time and place in question
and in a position to be notified, and I can tell you that I was
never notified. Because I was never notified of such an event,
it's my personal opinion that it never happened, at least not as
described, nor on the scale described."

That information, whether one agrees with it or not, should be a
part of the public record, the better to enable the reader (and
general public) to assess the claims and evidence being forward
by the writer or investigator.

When you're not told of those sources and leads that don't pan
out -- or that actually dispute the original story line entirely
-- then you're not being told the entire story. At the very
least, your perspective has been skewed.

Now, go back and read all the books that have been written about
Roswell and tell me how many times you come across qualifiers
like "the witness was unable to remember any incident at the
time like so-and-so claimed."

You won't find many, I assure you.

I know for a fact that Kent Lorenzo's testimony is virtually
non-existent in the pro-Roswell literature. When asked why, the
response is usually something along the lines of "well, he
couldn't or didn't advance the story." Or "he wasn't in a
position to know," etc.

The problem is not advancing the story, but uncovering what the
story really is. Roswell has already been so advanced that no
one can make sense of what was supposed to have happened there
-- how many objects, how many bodies, how many direct witnesses,
and so on.

What the Roswell story needs is de-advancing, not more
advancing.

My question, to which you were referring above, is how many more
Kent Lorenzos are out there? Who else who's been talked to has
failed to "advance" the story because they maintained that they
weren't aware of alleged events? Right now, we don't know.

If Lorenzo's testimony had been more widely known, it might have
at least tempered Glenn Dennis's autopsy claims. Instead, the
latter, because it "advanced" the story, was given considerable
prominence until finally shown to be highly unreliable.


Cheers,

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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

               Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? -

From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 03:08:15 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:13:36 -0500
Subject: Re: 'E.T.s' Coordinating Fly-by At Olympics? -


 >Source: downtoearth.com

 >http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/newscenter/weirdnews.html?qdate02-01-30&nav=VIEW&
id=8H19SR1031T020130

 >Wireless Flash Weird News - January 30, 2002

 >E.T.s Coordinating Spacecraft Fly-by At The Olympics?

 >PHOENIX (Wireless Flash) -- Next month's Winter Olympics
 >in Salt Lake City will be attracting all sorts of
 >tourists -- including E.T.

 >That's according to a Phoenix-based hypnotherapist who
 >claims she's been in contact with ETs all her life.

I wonder if she works with abductees.

 >Victoria Liljenquist says her "space brothers" have
 >told her they plan to fly a cigar-shaped craft over
 >thousands of Olympic spectators on February 21, sometime
 >between 12 p.m. and 5 p.m., weather permitting.

Weather permitting?

<snip>

 >That's just around the same time as the gold medal
 >round for the women's curling event.

 >Liljenquist says the UFO appearance "won't be subtle"
 >because ET motherships are anywhere from 250 to 1000
 >miles long. [!}

 >She says the ETs have chosen the Olympics to make their
 >big debut because it ensures a world wide audience will
 >see "undeniable proof of extraterrestrials' presence."

I hope everyone brings their cameras.


- 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                        Re: Mogul Shredded - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 15:17:40 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:16:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Lehmberg


 >From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:53:37 -700
 >Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:48:24 EST
 >>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:23:33 -0600
 >>>Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded

 >>>How do you know it would have been very badly deteriorated? If
 >>>Brazel had found the stuff the week before, as indicated, might
 >>>he not have stored it in a shed, out of sunlight, as the
 >>>original press release indicated? Or maybe he wrapped it in
 >>>something?

 >>If he had found it the week before, then it already would have
 >>been out in the sun for over 3 weeks. Charles Moore of Mogul has
 >>demonstrated on a number of occasions how the neoprene balloons
 >>deteriorated to a brittle "paper-ash" conditions within 2 to 3
 >>weeks.

 >This is from a previous UFO UpDates post at:

 >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/jun/m13-009.shtml

 >-----

 >From: legion@werple.net.au [John Stepkowski]
 >Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 09:09:43 +1000 (EST)
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:40:53 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Reply to Dennis Stacy

 ><snip

 >Prof. Moore was asked to sign a statement affirming that the
 >balloons degraded in a matter of _days_. Moore contacted Robert
 >Todd (_Cowflop Quarterly_, Vol 1. No. 1), and informed him that
 >the Air Force had got it wrong. It took _months_ for the
 >_material_ to deteriorate into a charred paper and ash-like
 >state.

Ah yes - Mr. Todd... that paragon of literary balance and easy
evenhandedness...

 >Regards,

 >Bruce Hutchinson

Ok - all that sounds as grounded as the fuzzy blue dickens, and
the very soul of faultless rationality... until it gets to the
first person with eyes to see and ears to hear...

In 1984 at the Army Aviation Center I led a class of senior
warrant officers involved in the capstone of our military
training, known, at the time, as the Warrant Officer Senior
Course. The course was branch immaterial and the locus of all
manner of warrant officer, from cooks to computer geeks and
aviators to supply managers, through physicians assistants and
motor supervisors to personnel specialists and boat captains...

The Army had us all there, together, to do a little efficacious
cross pollinating, and a good time was had by all - but I
digress. There was one other warrant officer represented from a
dying MOS (military occupational specialty) - a meteorologist...
a weather warrant. He was one of the last ones... The weather
was the province of the Air force, and the Army specialty in
meteorology was being phased out...

Each of us had to put on a little dog and pony show for the
other specialties as a function of the course with the intent of
educating the other specialties on the evolution or history of
-all- the specialties. That's what warrants are, or were at any
rate... specialists, experts in their field. I made my
presentation on the historical threat of totalitarianism and its
corresponding threat reaction of monstrous aeronautical strides
since 1940... the meteorologist made his on the history of Army
weather observation and balloons.

As he talked about the bone dry history of his specialty, he
enlivened the presentation considerably by propitiously blowing
up a huge weather balloon with a leg-sized canister of helium.
He had that helium really shrieking into that seemingly tortured
balloon, fluttering its sides and making it scream a banshee's
wail! Many of us on the front row of the amphitheater classroom
drew back, sure that the balloon was going to explode. Soon it
would have filled a small bedroom. As the balloon expanded,
periodically screaming with the pressured helium, the weather
warrant gave us a small class on the type of balloon used, its
uses, ceilings and etc... This type of balloon, made from
neoprene (I'm sure he said), had been in use since the
forties...

The balloon did not burst, in fact the presentation finished up
with him letting the biggest helium balloon I'd ever seen
indoors just bounce around the classroom blowing cool helium on
us as he came to a close. Finally, it just lay, spent, on the
floor. Thinking my son would get a kick out of it I asked the
guy if I could have it and he said yes.

...But he said that it wouldn't be good for very long. He said
they were "built to quickly disintegrate", and that "they didn't
have a very long life...". Hmmm.

I took it back to my BOQ room and put it in my sock drawer,
essentially forgetting about it. Four weeks later I flew back to
Germany from Fort Rucker and gave my son his little surprise...
some ragged and uneven sheets of crumbling rubber rapidly
turning to powder and issuing a noxious smell. It had broken
along the seams where I had folded it and had turned,
effortlessly, into a double handful of odiferous crap...

Now - I can appreciate the lauded masters of those piled higher
and deeper pronouncing on the longevity and survivability of
this balloon or that, but I had one turn to garbage in my owns
hands that was out of the sun and in a cool dry place. there you
have it.

You can understand, Mr. H... I'm conflicted. But that's the
hapless lot in life of one with eyes to see and ears to hear...

Lehmberg@snowhill.com
~~=D6~~
EXPLORE "Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his VSN 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
the specious and scabrous 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 18:28:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:19:06 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:27:37 -0800
 >From: Larry Hatch <larry@larryhatch.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman

 >Hello Virgilio:

 >Spy satellites routinely fly South to North and then North to
 >South again after they pass near one pole or the other.

 >Such orbits, with small adjustments, will eventually cover every
 >part of the Earth. Your standard tel-sats are generally on
 >equatorial orbits, and cover polar regions very poorly, or not
 >at all.

 >Lower orbits decay as they graze the upper reaches of the
 >atmosphere like spy sats often do. Launch motors (rockets)
 >almost always do, at least the first stages. These motors will
 >generally follow the same North South trajectories as their
 >payloads (spy sats), but at a lower altitude.

 >Once in a decay-mode, a satellite and/or launch rockets will
 >sometimes put on a magnificent display, depending upon time of
 >day etc. I saw a beauty once. It turned every color of the
 >rainbow in sequence. As it gracefully tumbled during burnout, it
 >apparently exposed one surface and then another to the plasma of
 >the ionosphere. A skeptical friend called me to point this out.
 >It took a good 20 minutes to cross the sky, from South to North
 >almost exactly.

 >I did not take the bait. I called back and indicated that I saw
 >a really neat space-junk burnout, but no UFOs.

Dear Larry,

I'm sorry but I just don't believe we're talking about
satellites here. Two Chilean law enforcement agents saw the
object change course before it disappeared, so it obviously
wasn't a satellite falling from the sky; even though I'm fully
aware that satellites tend to give the impression that they
travel horizontally when they descend through the atmosphere, as
well as the emission of colorful lights.

I could be wrong, and I'm no aeronautical expert, but I still
find it hard to believe that satellites travel from north to
south and vice versa. And finally, these ufo sightings occur at
least five or six times a month down there. I just have a hard
time believing that five or six satellites fall right out of the
sky every month in Chile alone. Sorry if we disagree... I still
think it's a UFO.


Regards,

Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                      Kelly Cahill On Banana TV's 'UFO'

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 11:13:24 +1100
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:22:27 -0500
Subject: Kelly Cahill On Banana TV's 'UFO'


Hi list,

The UFO show I am co-hosting with Doug Moffett now has 4
episodes up:


INTRODUCTION - in which "the terrible two" hosts, if you will,
interview each other re their backgrounds.

ABDUCTION - which includes some coverage of the October, 2001
Gundiah - Mackay 'abduction/teleportation/solid light' story
that I investigated with Diane Harrison of the Australian UFO
Research Network (AUFORN).

KELLY CAHILL - Parts 1 & 2 - a 2 part interview in which she
describes her striking 1993 abduction and also gets into the
impact of the experience.

Go to: www.bananatv.com

A TV will appear on your computer screen with at least 8
programme channel icons covering ininitially the following
categories: Health, Life and Style; School; People and passions;
Music and entertainment; Vehicles; Techno; Arts; Surviving
Survivor. The UFO programme can be found in the "People and
passions" section. The programmes are intended for broadband
internet but 56kbps will allow a reduced, but watchable view.
The full screen impact is seen with a broadband connection.  For
56kbps press low bandwidth and then select "UFO" in the "People
and Passions" section.  As with the other shows "UFO" will
eventually have multiple episodes which can be accessed at
anytime via the Banana TV site. Each programme lasts for about 7
to 8 minutes, with a brief "ad" break in the first minute.

If for some reason the site appears with another programme
defaulting, click on "home" on the right hand side of the "TV
set". That should reset the channels and allow you to revisit
the "People and Passions" section and get to "UFO".

Please support the show, as it will enable a lot more programmes
of this type to be carried.  Further episodes will be added over
coming weeks.

I'm sure you will find the shows of interest.


Regards,

Bill Chalker
Co-host 'UFO' Banana TV
www.bananatv.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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                  Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:40:53 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 05:25:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols -


 >From: Minna Hyv=F6nen <minna.hyvonen@kolumbus.fi>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols - Hyvonen
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 09:03:39 +0200


 >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >>Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 03:23:28 -0600

 >>>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:47:01 EST
 >>>Subject: Assistance, Suggestions & Protocols
 >>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 ><snip>

 >>An interested lurker asked me to pass this along, Jimbo... seems
 >>like good stuff to me.

 >>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello Minna, and Thank you Al,

 >>The first order of business would be to make the proposed study
 >>as "bullet-proof" as possible on the front end. (Before it
 >>begins)

Which is one of the reasons I asked the researchers on this List
for their input to begin with. You are quite correct.

 >Alfred posted a good "memory-list" about things that should be
 >done. Also, I=B4ll write basing my opinions to a lay-man's
 >experience in a small country and to the discussion between UFO
 >researhers and sceptics here.

 >In discussions in Finland the same old stories are heard.
 >Sceptics claims, that the work of ufo-researchers lacks of many
 >things and because it the work of ufo- researchers is not
 >credential. Sceptics claims those lacks are:

 >a) Educational. There is very rare academical people among
 >finnish ufo-researchers. Like Albert brought up, the credential
 >of these researchers should be possible to check (I=B4m not saying
 >these folks aren=B4t credential-ones).

I am not certain that we are on the same frequency. The people
doing the study are medical personnel of every conceivable
specialty as well as internists. These are not reseaerchers.
These doctors are not researchers and as a consequence, asked me
to provide input to them vis a vis the protocols which you
referenced. Here again, you are correct. With the exception that
we are speaking of doctors.

There is one serious correction which I must make to the
original anouncement. I stated that the primary focus of this
study was to make the association between the abduction
experience and PTSD. This is my hope. The physicians will make
their own set of priorities relative to making associations,
looking for common illnesses such as physical, emotional and
psychological.

We look to the research community to make further suggestions.
Thus far, except for one call I made to one of our listers,
there have been none. From researchers. From other sources,
there has been wonderful cooperation.

 >b)The lack of "the plan of research" (=3D freely translated).

 >Sceptics has told to the ufo-researchers in Finland, that there
 >should be a plan about the survey of people=B4s observations
 >and/or experiences they are gonna start. Without it the research
 >is not "(enough) scientific".

Define "abductee" is one suggestion. However using regressive
hypnosis is not commonly agreeable to the doctors, nor to me
coincidentally.

 >This plan should contain alot more than only an announcement
 >about the research just started. I guess you all know better
 >than me what this document is called in english, but to specify
 >what I=B4m trying to describe here is a list about some things it
 >should contain:

 >1) the reserach-problem

 >2) the issue of the research

 >3) plans how to fulfill this research (methods to research)

 >4) plans how to select the persons and researchers

 >5) list of researchers involving the project

 >6) how their credibility is varified

 >7) earlier publishments of the same study, if there
 > is any

There are none by the medical community as a group of related
physicians. As for researchers in the UFO community, again, we
look for, asked for and expect help in all of the above. Minna,
you are right on the money.

 >8) plans how long time is estimated to be needed to the research

 >9) evaluation of coming expenses, how much they are gonna be
 >   expenses in *each step* of the research, how the expenses are
 >   planned to find and how they are planned to use

Your numbers '8' and '9' are not exactly relevant, as the time
is being donated, if you will, by the medical group and several
associated specialists. For example, the dermatologist is a
member of another group but associated with my internist. They
are friends.

 >10) plans how to publish the results

Not in my book except in general terms. These folks plan to
extract a paper out of this. It's a little like this. One cannot
fault say, John Mack, for doing the research, except for his
methodology. Because of his reputation and position, it was a
feast (in the beginning) for his involvement. This group is
among the very best in our state, if not other states as well.
Their reputation precludes ridicule, if you get my drift.

 >11) plans how to handle the results

 >This document is needed when the research is ment to be as
 >scientific as possible. This document is also an advertisment to
 >those who may get intrested to give some funding to this
 >research (like Mr. Bigelow and Mr. Rockefeller has done).

While true, this is up to the group, as they are funding the program
entirely on their own.

 >Minna H

I've read some of your posts on another venue, when I was a
member and thank you for your suggestions. I hope I have
understood your questions and suggestions. If not, please feel
free to write me by using the special email address set up for
this matter. It is:

StudyProjectA@ AOL.COM

Thankyou again and nice hearing you again ... in a manner of
speaking.


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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:37:28 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:47:48 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 18:28:59 -0500

 >I could be wrong, and I'm no aeronautical expert, but I still
 >find it hard to believe that satellites travel from north to
 >south and vice versa.

Uh, this is about the easiest thing to verify. What is there
about it, that you seem so unwilling to accept?

If you have so many eyewitness reports, why don't you have the
simple datum about time-of-day of the incident?


Jim Oberg








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                          Re: Manned V-1's - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:02:54 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:53:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Manned V-1's - McCoy


 >From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@northropgrumman.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Manned V-1's
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:26:14 -0800

 >Errol, list:

 >The Germans never intended to developed 'Kamakazi' V-1's. That
 >kind of thing wasn't in their culture. The manned V-1s were
 >intended to find out why the unmanned ones kept crashing before
 >they were supposed to. Worked, too.

 >Steven


Hello, all, Steven

Well, the concept of the manned V-1 was to break up Bomber
Streams then the stragglers picked off after the formation fell
apart. Yes theoretically the German Culture didn't allow for
suicide missions, but Nazi culture did.

My late father-in-law had a story of SS tank crews fighting to
the last man. This was at the Battle of the Bulge. They were as
dangerous as any of the Al Queda are today. There weren't many
prisoners.

There were special volunteer 'Rammkommando' squadrons that the
Luftwaffe had that used an inexperienced pilot who flew a
rocket and cannon armed fighter into the middle of a Bomber
formation to, as above, break up the formation. but due to fact
that there were swarms of P-51s by that time, it was not a
success, few got close enough to do any damage, as the coupe de
grace was to fly your FW-190 into the side of a B-17 (you were,
however allowed to bail out at the last second.)


GT McCoy









                         The UFO UpDates Archive
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                 The Nashville & Waterbury 'UFO' Photographs

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:10:27 +0000 (GMT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:56:53 -0500
Subject: The Nashville & Waterbury 'UFO' Photographs



Some recent discussions on the 'UFO Research List' [UFORL] have
highlighted the evident true identity of the object responsible
for those purported 'Nashville' UFO photographs.

There are copies of the photographs and a background story
online, at:

http://www.rense.com/submissions/3ufosday.html

and

http://www.filersfiles.com/features/bethune.htm

Incidentally, this is not the same story of their alleged
origins as published by UFO Magazine (UK), in their front-cover
feature. However, that's very much an aside.

Of more importance is a 1980s magazine article containing
photographs of a 'disco' lighting-rig, which also produced smoke
effects - see:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/nashvlle.jpg

A comparison between this and the 'Nashville UFO' can be seen on
my web site, at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/nashcomp.jpg

There's another, more revealing, photograph from that magazine
article which I haven't yet uploaded.


An unexpected off-shoot from setting the 'Nashville UFO
encounter' in its true 'flying saucer' context, was that
another, equally celebrated photograph - the Waterbury 'UFO' -
might also owe its origins to the same source.

[According to the 'UFO Magazine' article, there were allegedly
numerous other photographs, never published, from our
'Nashville' portfolio].

The background to an apparent connection with the Waterbury
image has been explained on UFORL and this was a recent update:

Some time ago, I wrote...:

Explaining the true origins of the 'Waterbury' photograph would
not only be an unexpected bonus, it's a more significant
development than resolving the 'Nashville' collection.

This time, the claimed photographer apparently isn't anonymous,
plus the photograph was analysed. I wonder if the negative was
examined.

Mark Cashman's 'MUFON Connecticut' web site states:

Randy Etting, a resident of Newtown, was taking a walk outside
his home. A commercial airline pilot with over 30 years
experience, he always looked at the sky... he saw a number of
orange and red lights... approaching from the west... He... got
his binoculars and called his neighbors to come outside. The
object by this time was a great deal closer and seemed to be
over I-84, just east of Etting's home... the lights were
shimmering like distortion from engine heat, but he could hear
no sound... "As the UFO passed over I-84, cars in both the east
and west bound lanes began pulling over and stopping. The UFO
displayed a semi-circular pattern of very bright multicolored
lights. Five motorists reported that, as the object became
visible, a number of cars lost power and had to pull off the
highway. A State Police officer [who wishes to remain anonymous]
sent to investigate photographed the object.  "... Dr. Bruce
Maccabee... [analysed the photo]. His findings indicate the
object was huge, perhaps over a thousand feet across, and that
the lights showed a definite pattern. He also indicated the
lights seemed to have been flashing very quickly in some sort of
sequence, giving the impression that some were out of focus
while others were sharp."

See:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9047/picindex.htm

[...]


An irony is that the lights depicted in this photograph are
entirely consistent with a saucer-shaped object, not a
'boomerang.

I suppose someone must have thought it could pass for the
latter, and they were obviously correct, although I've always
considered the photograph had no obvious connection with a
boomerang-shaped source.

As we can now appreciate, our Waterbury flying saucer is either
travelling upside down, or was photographed from above!

An illustration of this can be seen at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/upended.jpg


If the Waterbury photograph is connected to those Nashville
pictures, then the image is 'upside down', intentionally or
otherwise.

It does actually look much more 'convincing' the right way up!
See:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/watrbry2.jpg

A comparison of light placement correlations between the
Waterbury 'UFO' and that 'Nashville' lighting rig can also now
be seen on my web site, at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/saucers2.jpg

A further comparison of some notable features is shown at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/saucers3.jpg

Note that the Waterbury image has to be both rotated and
'mirrored' to make this comparison.
[END OF EXTRACT]


It now turns out that Waterbury photograph on MUFON
Connecticut's web site is indeed apparently upside down!

At least according to 'UFO Encounters', by Jerome Clark and
Marcelo Truzzi - see:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ftp/watrbury.jpg

They claim the photograph was taken on May 26, 1988, whilst
MUFON Connecticut date it from May 26, 1987.

Does anyone know more about the background to this purported
photograph of an "enormous, slow-moving structure", especially
when it was supposedly taken and also first published? [END OF
UFORL EXTRACT]


It's not the intent to fragment related discussions, nor does
available time allow that, and I'll leave them on UFORL.

I would however point out some of the further correlations noted
- see:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UFORL/message/444


The above is simply for information and to clarify why I would
be interested to know if any UpDates subscribers can
straightforwardly answer the questions - is the MUFON image
upside down as originally surmised [any reason why the image
isn't also reversed?] and where/when/how did the Waterbury
photograph first become claimed evidence of a 'UFO' sighting?

How did Bruce Maccabee conclude the lights were from an object,
"perhaps over a thousand feet across"?


Please reply directly if that's preferable.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                  Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners

From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 11:11:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:01:04 -0500
Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB - Meiners


 >From: Robert Boreham <fatrob83@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 15:16:38 +0000

 >>Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:51:42 -0700
 >>From: Jean Meiners <legalco@uswest.net>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>Subject: Re: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB

 >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:56:38 CST
 >>>Subject: 2002 - The Year Of The MIB

 >>>It gets stranger and stranger.

 >>>So far in 2002, we have 3 (three) Hollywood movies, either out
 >>>already or soon to be released, which feature Men In Black as
 >>>significant characters.

 >><snip>

 >>Maybe they are trying to desensitize the general public to their
 >>appearance and presence?!

 >You'd have thought the public would already be desensitized by
 >now. The MIB stories have been about for years.
 >Or are we in for another "this is the year" (the aliens make
 >themselves known).

 >If i had a penny..... ;-)


I agree with Rob: "If I had a penny. . ."

There have been several TV programs enhancing the presence of
MIBs. But, in these shows they are always portrayed as being
members of some 'elite governmental agency'. I believe this with
all my heart... just don't know how to prove it.

I know from my own experience in the 50's that it wasn't the MIB
that caused a stir but the Air Force itself. With a wide-spread
sighting the Los Angeles Examiner picked up the story.

We lived on the campus of USC at the time and, not only I, but
several business people and students at that time witnessed Air
Force personnel in a pick up, wielding lock snips, go around,
force the newspaper dispensers open and take the papers out.
And, they weren't too far behind the guy that was actually
distributing them at that time.

Nothing was said, not a newscaster said anything anywhere. But,
for quite awhile it was the topic of conversation there.

Maybe these MIBs are actually attached to the Air Force?

Just a thought.

Jean M.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                          Re: Manned V-1's - Oberg

From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 14:23:44 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:05:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Manned V-1's - Oberg


 >From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@northropgrumman.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Manned V-1's
 >Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:26:14 -0800

 >The Germans never intended to developed 'Kamakazi' V-1's. That
 >kind of thing wasn't in their culture. The manned V-1s were
 >intended to find out why the unmanned ones kept crashing before
 >they were supposed to. Worked, too.

Gordon Cooper tells an interesting tale in 'Leap of Faith', pp.
153-154, recounting what he says he heard from Joaquin 'Jack'
Keutner, whom he worked with on the Mercury-Redstone rocket.

-----

In an attempt to improve accuracy over the target, some V-1s
were modified with a cockpit to allow for a pilot, Jack had
flown several trips across the English channel atop a V-1
strapped under a twin-engine Junkers bomber. After being dropped
free, he would air-start the "Flying Bomb". When they got within
range of London, he would release the bomb, then turn toward the
French coast and ride the rocket home. Before landing, Jack
would dump any remaining fuel and glide the V-1, modified with
landing skids, to a belly landing in a field.

One time, things didn't go as planned. For this flight, they
had a two-man cockpit in a V-1, and Jack was checking out a less
experienced pilot. When they were dropped by the Junkers, they
couldn't get an air start and had to turn back toward France.
Jack released the warhead but was unable to dump fuel, so they
came in heavy, loaded with combustable fuel and at a high rate
of speed: in excess of 270 miles per hour. They hit the field,
slid its entire length, and went into a pine forest, leaving a
trail of burning debris behind them. The rocket disintegrated.
Somehow Jack got out, but the other fellow didn't.

At war's end, a manned V-2 was sitting on the pad at Peenemunde,
all tested out, fueled up, and ready to go. It would have been
launched on a low-energy easterly orbit, Jack explained. The
plan: to drop a warhead on New York City. That 1945 manned
rocket flight - sixteen years before the first U.S. manned
rocket flight - came within a week or two of being launched."

-----

I guess the kindest thing to say about this silliness is that
Cooper must have been a sucker for wild and wooly 'war stories',
and it's sad he didn't know enough history and enough
aeronautical engineering to realize how impossible all these
tales were. That's assuming he actually did get these stories
from the German guy.


Jim Oberg










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                       Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 15:21:14 -700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:11:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Mogul Shredded - Hutchinson


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 23:02:08 EST
 >Subject: Mogul Shredded [was: Roswell Threads]
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:59:35 -700
 >>Subject: Re: Roswell Threads

David, List, and readers:

The flowing contains numerous snips, largely to try and contain
this reply to less than 30 pages. The reader should refer to the
referenced post for David=92s more elaborate contentions.

bh

 >Throughout this, notice that Bruce Hutchinson does not explain
 >how exactly only one radar target and one balloon ended up in
 >the Fort Worth photos.

That is, according to your analysis there is =93exactly one=94.

<snip>

 >This assumed configuration is
 >also based strictly on the 40+ year old memories and assumptions
 >of one man, Charles Moore of Mogul, and we will see more clearly
 >later how much Moore's assumptions, not facts, have driven the
 >Mogul hypothesis.

There is one person who is an acknowledged expert in this field,
and it ain=92t you. Charles Moore=92s "assumptions" are backed up
his expertise in this field, his presence at Alamogordo during
this time frame, and some documented references that have
survived.

Most of Roswell is based on old memories. If we outlaw all old
memories, we are left with only the newspaper clippings and the
photos, which certainly don't indicate a crashed alien
spaceship. Isn't it interesting that Rudiak doesn't like certain
memories but loves others? Yet Moore's would seem to fit with
what we do know about the NYU/Mogul Flights.

<snip>

 >Flight #5, however, shows no paper parachutes, only 1 silk one,
 >and _no_ radar targets. It is Flight #2 that shows 3 targets and
 >4 of the paper 'chutes. Since the Mogul hypothesis requires both
 >items to properly debunk Marcel's description of debris, it
 >would seem Flight #2 would be the best model configuration, not
 >Flight #5, sans targets and chutes.

Correct. Professor Moore stated that he devised a method of
determining height without using the pre-prototype radar targets
since radar targets hadn't worked well at all.

<snip>

 >Note that all
 >of this is a reconstruction, since Moore actually has no direct
 >memory of Flight 4, relying almost entirely on a brief entry in
 >a diary by one of the main Mogul people.

The 'memories' of Jim Ragsdale, Glenn Dennis, Frank Kaufmann,
Maj. Marcel, and many others have all been shown to be suspect.
At least Moore=92s is based on records, however skimpy.

 >A 7 to 10 hour flight time is another of those unsupported,
 >undocumented assumptions by Charles Moore needed to get his
 >little lost Mogul up as far as Brazel's place, also making all
 >sorts of assumptions about wind speeds and direction, balloon
 >rise rates, altitudes, launch time, and other "fudge" factors
 >required by Moore to create the necessary trajectory. Jiggle
 >these assumptions even a little bit and Flight #4 could just as
 >well have dropped on Col. Blanchard's head at Roswell, as Flight
 >#5 nearly did the next day.

The Foster Ranch is only about 85 miles northeast of the
Alamogordo launch site. A later 12 hour flight landed up in
Kansas and a 24 hour flight landed in Canada. And Moore used
weather service records, not assumptions about wind speed and
direction.

Moore's analysis indicated that after Flight 4 lifted off from
Alamogordo, it probably ascended while traveling northeast
(toward Arabela), then turned toward the northwest during its
passage through the stratosphere, and then descended back to
earth in a generally northeast direction. Moore's calculated
balloon path is quite consistent with a landing at the Foster
ranch, approximately 85 miles northeast of the Alamogordo launch
site and 60 miles northwest of Roswell. Furthermore, the debris
was strewn along the ground at a southwest-to-northeast angle
(as reported by Major Jesse Marcel); this angle is entirely
consistent with Moore's analysis.

As a check point, Moore used weather service data to calculate
the probable paths of flights 5 and 6, for which there are
records. His analysis agreed quite well with the actual data.

Finally, we have Haut's memory to assist Moore. In a 7/90 video-
taped interview with Haut conducted by Fred Whiting for the Fund
for UFO Reseach, Whiting asked Haut if he could remember
Blanchard ever mentioning the "flying saucer" matter after the
official weather balloon line was established. Haut replied that
he did, at a staff meeting a week or two later. He recalled
Blanchard opening the meeting with a comment something like
this: "Well, we sure shot ourselves in the foot with that
balloon fiasco. It was just something from a project at
Alamogordo, and some of the guys were here on our base later,
too. Anyway, it's done and over with."

This was taped several years before the Project MOGUL
explanation was found by Todd and Pflock and adopted by the AF.
So we have Haut saying before this was known that it was a
project from over at Alamogordo!

 >Now launching a Mogul at 2:00 in the morning instead of 5:00
 >(Moore's previous "memory" or assumption) doesn't make a lot of
 >sense,

What about: "June 4 Wed. Out to Tularosa Range and fired charges
between 00 and 06 this am=94. Why fire charges when you don=92t
intended to use them?

"I have a distinct memory that James Richard Smith, better known
as J.R., watched the 4 June balloon train through a theodolite
on a clear sunny morning and that Captain Larry Dyvad, our
contact with the Watson Lab SCR-584, reported that the radar had
lost the targets while J.R. had them in view. It is also my
recollection that the balloon train was tracked to about 76
miles (120 km) northeast of Alamogordo by the B-17 crew. As I
remember this flight, the B-1 7 crew terminated their chase
while the balloons were still airborne (and while J.R. was still
watching them through the theodolite) in the vicinity of Capitan
Peak, Arabela, and Bluewater, New Mexico. I, as an easterner,
had never heard of those exotically named places, but their
names have forever afterward been struck in my memory. This
flight provided the only connection that I have ever had with
those places. From the note in Crary's diary, the chase was
terminated because of the poor reception of the telemetered
acoustic information by the receiver aboard the plane."

 >From =93UFO Crash at Roswell: The Genesis of a Modern Myth=94.
Benson Saler, Charles A. Ziegler, and Charles B. Moore.
Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington and London. 1997.

 >especially this very first N.M. flight, since visual
 >tracking of the balloons through theodolites was an important
 >component of tracking during the first few hours of flight, and
 >you can't track visually in the middle of the night. So another
 >of Moore's assumptions is that they didn't need visual tracking
 >because they had a radiosonde and radar reflectors for tracking
 >as well, even those these remained untested in the new setting
 >of N.M.

"Given that the plan was to use the Watson Lab radar to track
our instrumented flights, I think that this flight was a test of
the radar tracking and it was not successful."

Why was this the plan?

"To minimize the amount of equipment to be transported to New
Mexico by plane, Peoples decided to obtain the height
measurements needed for the acoustic measurements by tracking
the balloons with the Watson Laboratories SCR-584 radar
operating in the North Area of the Alamogordo Army Air Field.
This radar had been installed to track the German V-2 rockets
being launched from White Sands Proving Ground, just across the
Tularosa Valley from the Army Air Field."

And the preferred method wasn't optical, it was to "record the
pressure signals from balloon-borne radiosondes for our
preferred height-determination method

And it wasn't just Moore's memory: "Several of the NYU Balloon
Group members still remember these colored markings on the
targets we used in Alamogordo in 1947. The significance of the
markings puzzled us each time that we prepared a target for
flight." This seems to indicate that several of the people still
remember that these unique radar targets were used. Not just
Moore.

 >See how easy it is to make Flight 4 work if you just assume
 >whatever you need to make it work?

Or, you can observe thusly: See how easy it is to make any
assumption you want and make Flight #4 NOT work?

 >I have gone into great and gory detail on this because Roswell
 >debunkers like Bruce just uncritically repeat the debunking
 >party line without thinking or caring about all the hidden
 >assumptions behind all this.

And the debunkers of the Skeptic's 'party line' always seem to
ignore the fact that they use assumptions to debunk what they
deride as 'assumptions'. Go figure.

 >They instead repeat Charley Moore's
 >version of events, instead of acknowledging Moore keeps changing
 >his "memories" of what happened=85

After hearing Bill Moore's description of the wreckage
(including details of supposed 10-inch furrows running some
500ft), Charlie Moore responded by saying: "Based on the
description you gave me, I think that could not have been our
balloon." Balloon trains like Flight 4 were far too light to
make large furrows in the ground.

The issue is not that Charles Moore said the wreckage couldn't
have been a balloon - it's that he said his flights couldn't
have plowed the alleged 'furrows'.

Moore and other Mogul participants originally thought the debris
Brazel found must have been from one of NYU's polyethylene
balloon flights from early July 1947. He held this opinion until
just few years ago. These large, transparent polyethylene
balloons were used for the first time ever in the summer of 1947
(after the June launches) and would have looked strange even to
experienced balloon watchers. However, after seeing the reports
and photographs from 1947 for the first time, Charles Moore
realized that Flight 4 was a much better candidate for the
Foster ranch debris than a polyethylene balloon. So most of his
changes of opinion on the incident are because better data
became available.

 >Again, how could Bruce Hutchison possibly know that "most" of
 >the balloons were still intact? Yet another assumption
 >apparently based on psychic abilities.

Moore has stated that this is how these balloons failed.

 >>The train sagged to the ground until sufficient weight was
 >>relieved from the system for the remaining balloons to stay
 >>aloft. Wind dragged the train over the ground, mangling the
 >>Rawins, until it became entangled in rocks and brush.

 >Now here's a _real_ important point and one the debunkers keep
 >sweeping under the rug. Notice those _multiple_ Rawins being
 >dragged along the ground and "mangled." There should be pieces
 >rom all those targets on the ground - right?

Possible - depending on how many Rawins were in contact when the
train reached equilibrium.

 >Fast forward to Brazel's Roswell Daily Record interview. They
 >quote him as saying, "When the debris was gathered up the
 >tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet
 >long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle
 >about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick."

Yep- that=92s an alien spaceship, all right!

 >In other words, those multiple, mangled targets would have been
 >all rolled up together into one bundle.

Assumption.

 >When you unpack that bundle in Fort Worth for photos, there
 >should be some evidence of multiple targets all mixed up into
 >one bundle - right? - extra framework sticks and extra
 >triangular foil panels used to make the targets.

Assumption.

An Article of Faith with Rudiak is that the FW pictures show all
the debris that was on Gen Ramey=92s floor - which is another
assumption of David=92s part.

 >Now let me again break the bad news to the debunkers, based not
 >on an eyeball estimate, but on a very careful, 3-D computer
 >analysis of the photos I have been doing the last two weeks.

Your work here is to be commended, but, as we do have the basis
here for independent review of your work, I would suggest that
you find an unbiased third party that can verify your analysis.

There is also a point you might have missed: What is your basis
for an assumption that the FW photo=92s show _all_ of the debris
that was on Ramey=92s floor? There is plenty of room to stage
right for additional debris to have been present.

 >Furthermore, the white paper backing on this single target is
 >surprising clean for a target that was supposedly dragged and
 >shredded through the dirt, left out in the open for a month, and
 >cycled through a few thunderstorms. This paper is uniform,
 >bright white. There is no evidence of dirt and no water stains
 >anywhere to be seen.

Until you can replicate the material, verify and replicate the
weather on Foster=92s ranch (not at Roswell!), and replicate the
effects of Bond=92s flash on this material, then all you have are
assumptions- or as you put it, =93wishful thinking=94.

<snip>

 >But according to the way the balloons trains were configured,
 >these should have all come down together and been found in the
 >same general crash area along with the one magical, clean
 >shredded Rawin and one magical, intact, nonshredded balloon
 >seen in the Fort Worth photos.

And all you have to back this up are assumptions. OTOH, Moore
has stated that his observations of these systems is that they
fail gradually. Moore=92s expertise vs. your assumptions- no
contest.

 >Which all goes to prove that if you are allowed to make any
 >assumptions you want and then apply some additional magical
 >thinking and handwaving, then you explain away anything.

Your Magic Wand has not demonstrated that your assumptions are
more valid than Moore=92s expertise and my assumptions.

 >>Even Mac had recovered piebald balloons in the past.

 >According to Bessie Brazel Schreiber, the weather balloons they
 >recovered on the ranch had award tags, indicating they were
 >probably radiosondes, not bare "piebald" balloons. If
 >radiosondes, then the lifting balloon, if still present would be
 >identical to those used on Mogul, not a pigmented "piebald"
 >balloon (which weren't all pigmented, BTW).

Granted, but they were tagged. Remember- when Mac originally
found the debris, he stuffed it away as junk. Had Mac not heard
of all the fuss about Flying Disks two weeks later, he probably
would never have given it another thought.

 >>But these
 >>past recoveries had not included foil and sticks. It was not the
 >>balloon material that made the debris unusual, it was the Rawin.

 >Yeah, yeah. The aluminum foil, balsa wood, Scotch tape, and
 >white paper was just s00000 mysterious. Everybody goes gah, gah
 >at Roswell.

 >Now let's get serious. Again I toss out the following questions,
 >which remain unaddressed and unanswered by the debunkers. No
 >magical thinking allowed.

 >1. How did exactly one Rawin end up in Ramey's office, not one
 >scintilla more or less? (Remember, no magical thinking)

One of each according to _your_ analysis.

 >2. How could the white paper on the Rawin be so clean after
 >being dragged through the dirt to shred it and then
 >thunderstormed on?

What makes you believe that it was =93thunderstormed on=94?

 >3. How can one possibly account for the complete absence of even
 >a shard of another Rawin? How could the other Mogul Rawins
 >escape completely unscathed while leaving exactly one shredded
 >Rawin behind to be later gathered up into that one bundle by
 >Mack Brazel? (Remember, no magical thinking.)

(This is more 'Magical Thinking' on David=92s part. I am sure that
he believes that his computer is The Authority here, but why
should we believe his computer, when he asks us not to believe
Prof. Moore=92s?)

 >4. How come there are no "fragments" of multiple popped and
 >shredded balloons in the Fort Worth photos? Why does the balloon
 >material in the photos actually look intact?

And why, pray tell, should it not look intact? Just because I
proposed a scenario that called for a fragmented balloon, does
not give my proposal any weight of authority.

 >5. Why can the balloon material in the photos be accounted for
 >by one balloon with no need for multiple balloons to explain it?
 >Why did Ramey and minions, such as weather officer Newton,
 >always describe it as singular, as they did the radar target?
 >Why does Newton insist to this day that's all there was?

Because that is all there was on the floor?

 >6. Why does the balloon still look flexible, being folded in a
 >pile and showing stretch marks? Supposedly it should be brittle
 >and breaking up into "ash-like" flakes after a month in the sun.

(covered under separate posts.)

 >7. Why didn't Ramey display Cavitt's "black box" along with the
 >other debris, the alleged radiosonde "battery box." Nothing

Ask Cavitt. He has not proven to be a very verbose character. As
long as we are having fun with assumptions; Perhaps he was
unaware of Marcel=92s flight to FW, and did not think it worth
bringing up after Ramey=92s explanation.

 >8. What happened to all the other payload gear that should have
 >come down together with the Rawins on the Mogul - items like
 >the radiosonde and sonobuoy supposedly on Flight 4? Not only
 >aren't these items in the photos, no witness in the field
 >described them either. Why?

Who knows? Cavitt=92s Black Box may be one of them; maybe he
collected more? Maybe they were ripped off while the system was
dragged, and could have been found if they had backtracked.

 >9. What happened to the twine tying everything together that
 >should also have been found?

Bessie described eyelets, and Bill Brazel said he found some of
the monofilament.

 >10. Why would the FBI be told that Wright Field disagreed with
 >the assessment of it being a radar target suspended from a
 >balloon? Why would Wright Field disagree? Why would it be
 >necessary to forward the target and balloon on to Wright Field
 >for identification yet again, after Newton's supposedly
 >definitive ID and Ramey's announcement that the special flight
 >to Wright Field was no longer necessary.

If someone at FW was, or became aware of, the possible security
issues with NYU tests, then a certain amount of reticence is
understandable. It is reasonable to assume that this was the
case, as the debris was forwarded to Col Duffy, then head of the
Project, not just anyone at the AMC. Given the tight security
around Mogul, it would be SOP to ask that the material should be
forwarded on make sure that there were no further problems to be
expected.

Blanchard=92s remarks, as related by Haut, would seem to indicate
that this is probably the way it happened.

 >11. Can even one item or physical characteristic of the debris
 >shown in Fort Worth clearly indicate it must have come from
 >Mogul instead of being a standard Rawin and meteorological
 >balloon from somewhere else/

Can you can come up with a record of a AAFB stockpiling degraded
neoprene balloons and shredded Rawins, and come up with a
reasonable explanation on why a crashed spaceship should just
happen resemble so closely this stockpiled degraded neoprene,
tinfoil and balsa?

 >Curiously that is also exactly what witnesses Marcel and Dubose
 >said happened. Imagine that.

Ahhh yes, those same 30-40 year old memories that you trashed so
conveniently when talking about Prof. Moore. Imagine that!

Here is a comment dredged from a previous UFOupdates post from
Kevin Randle:

"Damn, I really hate to have to agree with Mr. Todd about
anything, but I will on this one point. Prof. Moore has always
been kind and helpful to me and I don't believe that he would
intentionally spin the truth to his point of view. "



Regards,

Bruce Hutchinson






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                          Magonia Supplement No. 38

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:49:01 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:14:56 -0500
Subject: Magonia Supplement No. 38


MAGONIA SUPPLEMENT No. 38
22 January 2002

EDITORIAL

Our Editorial in the previous issue provoked an angry response
from UFO historian Jerome Clark, on the UFO UpDates mailing
list. Here are the more relevant quotes from his message:

"To use an atrocity like the 11 September slaughter to score
cheap points against ufologists who presume to disagree with
Magonia's favored beliefs is, at best, to make oneself look
cynical beyond reason and, at worst, to raise questions
concerning your sense of moral proportion.

"Though I don't think much of psychosocial ufology, I have
always thought well of you, John. I would have expected better.
You're making about as much sense as the California pro-gun
group that exploited the atrocity to promote its crusade against
gun control."

Clark has missed the point, as usual. Atrocities always spark
off debates on subjects which have some relevance to them.
Massacres by mad gunmen in Britain led to intensive debates
about guns, their uses and abuses, and who should be allowed to
own and use them, and under what conditions. To suggest that
debates about the laws concerning guns, and their relevance to
the question of terrorist threats, should be taboo is just
humbug.

There is one thing that can confidently be stated about guns,
however: they belong to the real world. It is possible to have
serious debates and discussions about them. On the other hand,
the human-alien hybrids and the crashed saucers at
Wright-Patterson AFB belong to the world of fantasy.

Many ufologists evidently have a strong distaste for reality,
like Elwood Dowd (James Stewart) in the film Harvey (1950), who
says: "I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, and I'm happy,
doctor, I finally won out over it."

Magonia prefers to face reality, and it does not have any
"favored beliefs". Its editors and contributors try to bring a
bit of logic, and respect for facts rather than wild
speculations, into the mad little world of ufology. Of course
this approach makes UFO stories seem rather less interesting
than when they are presented by the writers of gee-whiz books
and the lecturers at crazy UFO conferences. But ufologists must
make their choice. Are they engaged in serious, objective
research and debate, or are they just providing a form of
popular entertainment?


********************
MOON ROOF OPTIONAL

Martin S. Kottmeyer

It is a starry summer evening about twelve miles from Paris in
1950. An ex-pilot who runs the Bar de L'Escadrille near the
airport takes a stroll before going to bed. He hears a whistling
like the wind and turns to see two flying saucers have landed a
few hundred feet nearby. They are each 16 feet in diameter, four
and a half feet high in the centre, and all round their edges
are little oblong windows. Thick oval doors open and out steps
one man from each saucer. They are five and a half feet tall,
have brown hair, and wear flying suits that, in the darkness,
seem dark brown or dark blue.

They both run to a point on one of the machines where a rod
running from the centre of the disc to the edge needs to be
reset or replaced. The rod has a rubber pad at the end and is
one of many that lie about eight inches apart around the
machine. The witness remarked that the repair was done "with
naked hands, without any tools". He walked up to them and asked
if they had had a breakdown. They were briefly startled, but
calmly indicated, "Yes, but it will soon be all right".  This
was said very slowly, but in accurate French.

The repair was done quickly in roughly a minute. The men opened
the doors again and a blinding light came from the interior. The
witness emphasised, "the light was the most perfect I had ever
seen". He could see no source to it and he saw no shadows.
Sitting at the centre of the craft was a red leather dentist's
chair. Above this was "a very large kind of oval steering wheel,
with a handle at each extremity. It was all metal and covered in
signs and switches. To the front of the chair was something like
a wireless set with seven or eight knobs. There were also
several other pieces of apparatus around the chair on pedestals.
The witness tried to engage the pilot in conversation and asked
him about "the uses of the many knobs on the instrument-board".
He answered back, "Power". (1)

A few seconds later the doors on each saucer closed. From the
outside the machine appeared weightless and hung four or five
inches above the ground. It looked like aluminium to him. The
holes along the edge of the craft lit up and the machines took
off at tremendous speed accompanied only by a sound like the
wind. The witness, however, felt nothing. He decided against
telling anyone and noticed the next day that there was not the
slightest evidence that anything had happened. The grass was not
flattened, reinforcing the impression there had been no
landing-gear. (2)

This story was told to French ufologist Jimmy Guieu and a
producer on Radio Monte Carlo, Fernand Carlo some time in the
early 1950s. Guieu emphasises that the interview took place
before George Adamski's book Flying Saucers Have Landed had gone
to press. This was to allay concerns that similar details like
the craft hanging above the ground could not have been gleaned
from that source. Guieu's book had been written and revised by
January 1954 and this places an upper limit for the appearance
of this saucer repair case. It is not the first repair case of
the saucer era - the April 1950 Bruno Facchini case predates it
- but it is near the head of a rather long line of such
encounters.

Here, we are not dealing with distant points of light and
matters of interpretation. There are no issues of illusion,
misidentification, and honest mistakes in a case like this. The
witness talked with a guy who spoke back in good French and took
off in a flying saucer only a few feet in front of his eyes.
There's no middle ground. The story is either true or completely
false. The claimant, Claude Blondeau, had been both a commercial
pilot and one with the Air Force and had 1,500 flying hours to
his credit. People like that automatically get points for mental
stability to have held such positions.

There was very little here to boggle the mind in terms of
science. The craft defies gravity, but little else. We get none
of the biological absurdities of abduction lore, no switching
off of witnesses, no mind rays. There is no appeal to religious
or spiritual sensibilities. It is a simple technological tale.
An ex-pilot gets a glimpse inside a new flying machine: a
leather seat, a steering wheel with switches close at hand, and
an array of extras at arm's length. It is so quiet you only hear
the wind even at full throttle. And it is so simple you can fix
it without tools! A dream car of the air. All we need to know is
whether it's a Porsche or Lamborghini.

Looking back on this story with 50 years distance and
perspective forces complications on what had to have looked like
an admirably plausible story at the time. All those knobs and
switches sounded reasonable in the Fifties, but by the turn of
the century, Roswellians began to speak of their crashed saucers
having equipment proving they are controlled by mental
interfaces. MILAB lore tells of abductees involuntarily enlisted
into experiments with these interfaces. (3) Given what we now
know about computer technology, mental interfaces are a more
logical expectation than a saucer controlled by banks of
switches. Given this development, Blondeau's saucer now firmly
belongs in antique shows rather than UFO showrooms.

That big old steering wheel at the centre of the saucer is a
feature that certainly seems unique among UFO stories. Bullard
at least completely missed listing any examples in his study of
the craft used in abductions. (4)Offhand, I can't recall seeing
one in any contactee stories either. The holes along the rim
that light up on take-off seem an odd detail, similar to yet
different from the more common feature of jets of flame along
the rims of the pinwheeling saucers seen in this period. There
is a crude approximation to this style of lighting in one of
Budd Hopkins's cases, the 1975 George O'Barski encounter, but if
there is a more exact match it evidently was not popular enough
to make it into Stacy and Huyghe's recent Field Guide to UFOs.
(5)

The admission by the man working on the rod that the craft had
broken down, but would soon be all right, could be regarded as a
doubtful matter.  As Kent Jeffrey argued in the context of the
implausibility the Roswell crash, technology seems to get
increasingly reliable as time goes by. (6) Shouldn't a
sufficiently advanced technology, first, need little or no
repair-- second, monitor itself to foresee the need for
maintenance before failure in flight -- and third, repair itself
without human hands, i.e. by mechanical helpers or
nano-technology?

One puzzle the story places before a listener is whether we are
dealing with an alien craft or secret earth technology. The talk
of brown-haired men in dark flight suits invites the presumption
of earthly origin. The fact that the man talks good French, but
slowly, prefers an inference of training in a foreign language
over aliens who would likelier invoke telepathy or other magical
analogues. The fact that the craft is single- seater suggests a
craft in an early stage of development, and the presence of two
allows the thought that one was a spotter chaperoning a newly
built copy on a shake-down cruise. With an alien craft, you tend
to expect a crew aboard.

Yet there is that detail where Blondeau speaks of a pure light
without source or shadow which sounds as if he is exploiting the
poetics of religious visions. This is a celestial light, the
light of heaven and angelic souls. Too, the weightless character
of the craft also defies everyday intuitions about earthly
matter. Such quiet defiance of gravity is more in line with
spirits and supermen than rocket science. Both these marvels
appear elsewhere in contactee lore (7) and abduction lore. (8)
They also appear in conjunction with aliens in science fiction
literature (9) and science fiction films. (10) Hence they seem
more 'right' for an ETH viewpoint.

We might fit the celestial light detail into the secret
technology framework by appeal to atomic power.The pure light
would allude to radioactivity, reactor glow, and the alchemy of
atomic fire. The weightlessness is trickier, but may simply
allude to magnetic forces being harnessed, perhaps as a spin-off
from the Manhattan Project or from cyclotron work on particle
physics. The more desperate ETH advocates may, however, choose
to argue that the appearance of these details in other UFO
reports points to shared alien reality. There was no secret
saucer technology on earth in 1950 capable of accounting for the
Blondeau CE3K and it must be real, given the character of the
witness and the validation provided by such identical details.

Without a confession signed in blood, there is probably no hope
of convincing diehards that this case is an obvious fiction, but
I suspect culture trackers and those worried by that monster
steering wheel can be more easily cajoled to appreciate the need
for accepting an argument for unreality.

The key to what this story is about, at least to my eye, is the
moment when the saucer pilot shrugs off the questions about what
the knobs are for and succinctly answers, "Power". This a
handsome moment and to get the full and proper reaction you
should not be reading it in a saucer book, but hearing it in the
Bar de L'Escadrille. This is a story inspired, shaped, and
informed by 'guytalk'. The template is the guys sitting around
talking about their cars and the cars of the big guys - racers
and high rollers. The talk comes around to one guy telling how
he got to get a close look at the sports-machine of one of the
big guys. The driver stopped because his 'rod' needed a little
adjustment. He wants to chat with him and so asks him about all
the eye-popping stuff he sees inside. The big guy is a
no-nonsense sort and cuts him short with that single word -
Power. It distils down to the essence all he really needs to
know. The big guy has it - YOU don't. The listeners at the bar
smile, for they understand. Everything with guys is about power.
The bigger the engine, the faster the car.  It is about being
more powerful than the next guy.

What Blondeau's story has done is to lightly transmute the
technological elements into a futuristic framework. It is the
guy-thing taken up the next rung of the technological ladder.
The saucer is little more than a sports car with a third
dimension. Beyond the steering wheel, reclining leather seat,
radio, knobs and switches, we know from the closing scene that
it has speed. It goes from zero to zenith in the blink of an eye
and does it smoothly: leaving only the sound of the wind.
Picture that scene again. The big guy has delivered the word
"Power," shuts the door, and speeds straight up into the sky
with the whisper of wind. Blondeau has written the perfect
commercial for the dream-car of the future. It is just too good
to be true.

Regardless of the shape of the car, this is every guy's fantasy.

Notes
1. Eric Zurcher's catalogue of French CE3K cases gives the
response as "Energie" which is admittedly less richly allusive
than what appears in this English translation. I obviously
prefer the use of the word Power here, but it does not
fundamentally matter to the dream-car analogy. Zurcher types the
case as a work of imagination and notes that a dossier exists
that disputes the case. No confession is cited. Les Apparitions
d'Humanoides, Editions, Alain Lefeuvre, 1979, 173-174

2. Jimmy Guieu, Flying Saucers come from Another World,
Hutchinson, 1956, 229-232

3. Melinda Leslie lecture notes. "If Not --- Then Why All This?:
The Military Harassment, Surveillance and Re-abduction of Alien
Abductees: Evidence for the Reality of UFO Abductions",
http://www.militaryabductio n.com/Main.htm

4. UFO Abductions: The Measure of a Mystery, chapter 10, 205-207

5. Dennis Stacy and Patrick Huyghe, The Field Guide to UFOs,
Quill, 2000, 46-47. For closer cases with such rim lights see ad
plane IFO cases in Hendry's UFO Handbook, 92, 86. Obviously,
though, the Blondeau saucer is not an ad plane. So, yet another
wrinkle in the similarities = shared reality equation.

6. Kevin Randle, The Roswell Encyclopedia, Quill, 2000, 167-168

7. light: Truman Bethurum, Aboard a Flying Saucer, DeVorss,
1954, 42 - lite: Bethurum, 36

8. light: Charles Moody in Coral and Jim Lorenzen, Abducted!,
Berkley Medallion, 1976, 43 - lite: Betty Andreasson in Raymond
Fowler, The Andreasson Affair, Prentice-Hall, 1979, 174

9. light: Paul W. Fairman's short story "Brothers Beyond the
Void", Fantastic Adventures, 14, 3, March 1952, 56-62 - lite:
William Tenn, "Consulate" (1948), see "A Klassic Abduction
Found", The REALL News, 9, 3, May 2001, 1, 6-7

10. light: Star Trek, "Return of the Archons" - lite: "The
Cosmic Man" (1959)

********************
LETTERS

We all have our own ideas of  what constitutes good and bad UFO
evidence or testimony. My own instinct is to reject any witness
whose testimony consists of claims such as: "Officials made
death threats if we talked about it" and "Remember, this meeting
never took place . . ." Such remarks inhibit me from taking
seriously any anecdotal evidence this witness offers thereafter.

Yet this kind of testimony has popped up time and again in
ufology. One example was indirectly brought up at a recent
conference where the speaker referred to the "Disclosure
Project" press conference held by Dr Steven Greer in Washington
last May. According to this speaker, the Fortean Times account
of the said conference (in FT148, July 2001) was heavily biased
and only mentioned the more, shall we say, extremist testimony,
but omitted any mention of the evidence given by John Callahan,
a former Federal Aviation Administration employee. The speaker
called this omission "disgraceful", and earned a round of
applause.

Callahan's testimony centred round an incident he was involved
in, namely the radar/visual sighting by a Japanese airliner over
Alaska in November 1986. I then looked at his testimony (as
printed in UFO Magazine). In the course of it Callahan claims
that soon after the incident he attended a top level meeting
which included "three men from Reagan's scientific staff, three
CIA people, three FBI people and I don't remember who the other
guys were, with all the FAA experts . . . " The purpose of this
meeting was to decide what to tell the public. Callahan then
testifies: "When it was all done one of the CIA men told the
people they were now swaorn to secrecy, that this meeting never
happened and this event [the UFO incident] never happened." Of
course everyone knows the incident indeed happened.

Callahan then relates: "Now I have told this story many times,
and I get sometimes funny looks from people." And well he might,
for if he was genuinely warned that the said meeting "never
occurred" why was he telling people of this meeting at all? Why
had he violated his oath of secrecy so quickly? Yet Callahn is,
he claims, prepared to testify before Congress (assuming of
course that Congress ever bothers to devote any time to this
"Disclosure Project").

Is there a recorded case of anyone ever having been prosecuted
for revealing either details of a UFO incident or an official
meeting to discuss such an incident?

Christopher D. Allan, Stoke-on-Trent


Recently I finally got to see Fire in the Sky, which is based on
the Travis Walton case. What struck me as truly unbelievable was
not the UFO abduction, but what a weird lot of rednecks
allegedly inhabit Arizona. Or were the earthbound sequences just
Hollywood licence?

You have raised the question of why there are so few
multiple-witness sightings. Though this is indeed a serious
objection to nuts-and-bolts hypotheses, I think that the
explanation is partly to do with the way sightings are reported
or not reported. Some UFO scepics appear to hold to the
extraordinary notion that any UFO witness will necessarily make
a report. In fact, over the years I have met a number of people
with UFO experiences, which I learned about when the subject of
ufology chanced to be raised. In no case had they reported to
anyone, though one woman had written a letter to Tony Dodd
which, however, she never sent. This suggests that most
sightings are not reported.

In July last year a man living near Walthamstow Marshes in East
London told me that he had seen a UFO at 8.50 pm on 27 June. It
was a black coloured crescent with two red lights, hovering over
a mobile phone aerial about a hundred yards from the living room
window of his flat. He watched it for a bout a minute as it
slowly rotated. The lights turned white and started flashing.
Then it shot off over a clump of trees on the marsh, and went
out of sight.

There must have been dozens, perhaps hundreds of windows with a
view of that mast, but I know of no other reports. Yet this does
not necessarily mean that the UFO was not objective. Midway
through a Wednesday evening most people would either have gone
out or be watching television. Suppose that it was real and that
a dozen people did see it. At least half of them would not
bother to tell anyone (my informant, once again, only mentioned
it to me after the topic happened to come up in conversation).
Of those who did, one could guess what would occur. One would
telephone the police and receive nothing but a caution for using
the emergency line for a frivolous purpose. Another would write
to the Ministry of Defence and get the standard brush-off letter
that UFOs are of no defence significance. A third would write to
London airport, who throw all such letters in the waste paper
basket. A fourth would telephone the local paper, who might be
interested, but in most cases are not. The remaining two would
write to two separate UFO organisations. One of these, being
understaffed, would not reply, while the other would send back a
sighting report form. This, when completed, would be filed away
and forgotten. There is no central co-ordination of reports,
which usually are not available to the public.

It would be a possible but unenviable task to make door to door
enquiries: that area is rather rough, and most people have
barred metal gates in addition to the ordinary front door. A
friend who recently did research for the transport planning
authority tells me that the commonest response to ringing
peoples' bells asking for information is to be told to go away
(in much stronger words than that).

There you have it. If there are multiple-witness sightings, then
quite likely we shall never know about them.

Gareth J. Medway, London

*******************
ODDS AND ENDS

Cruel hoax.
Do you know that if you collect umpteen thousand Walkers crisp
[potato chips, for our transatlantic chums] packets then this
philanthropic firm will pay for expensive medical treatment for
a sick or crippled child? Well, if you hear such a story from
someone collecting crisp packets, tell them not to waste their
time; it's just a "cruel hoax". This particular one has been
doing the rounds for many years in Britain and, for some obscure
reason, it is always Walkers crisps.

The latest victims are police officers in Plumstead, London,
according to The Sun (27 October 2001). A man claiming to
represent Walkers phoned the police station telling them that
they knew of a boy suffering from leukaemia, and if they
collected this boy's 6-stone weight in crisp packets the firm
would pay to have him sent to the USA for treatment. Suspicions
were aroused when a policeman's wife who is a school teacher
asked her pupils to help and found that colleagues were already
collecting for a different Walkers charity scheme.

So they finally did the obvious thing and checked with Walkers,
who of course knew nothing of these schemes. Pc Mark Davies
said: "I cannot believe some sicko would prey on people's
feelings like this."

Silly names.
Connoisseurs of silly names should turn their attention to the
Japanese car industry. In the motoring supplement of The Daily
Telegraph (27 October 2001) Mike Rutherford, inspired by his
recent visit to the Tokyo Motor Show, gives a list of model
names for cars.

He writes: "In the past, there have been some corkers: the
Toyota Synus, Mitsubishi Dingo, Suzuki Alto Afternoon Tea,
Toyota Country Boy and Deli Boy Supreme, Nissan Cedric and, my
favourite, the Mitsubishi Lettuce."

This year's show included concept vehicles called: the Isuzu
Begin Funky Box, Nissan Nails, Honda Life Dunk, Mazda Secret
Hideout, Daihatsu Naked F, Toyota Cist and Suzuki Van Van.

Everyday cars on sale in Japan include: the Daihatsu Terios Kid,
Honda Fit, Mazda Bongo Friendee, Isuzu Big Horn, Mitsubishi
Delica Space Gear, Nissan Datsun, Suzuki Every Landy and Toyota
Sparky.

Silly excuses.
A recent survey gathered information on reasons for absences
from work. Most of them were the usual headaches and stomach
upsets. However, "The survey found that excuses as bizarre as
having a foot stuck in the toilet, having keys buried by the dog
and getting abducted by aliens have been used by those desperate
to avoid work." (The Daily Telegraph, 6 November 2001)

Letters and articles welcome. Please send them to the Editor:

John Harney - harney@harneyj.freeserve.co.uk

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Magazine
www.magonia.demon.co.uk

"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, and I'm happy, doctor,
I finally won out over it." Elwood Dowd (James Stuart) in
"Harvey"








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                  Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Hutchinson

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:09:14 -700
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:20:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II - Hutchinson


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:39:58 EST
 >Subject: Re: Roswell Threads - Pt II
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net


 >Part II:

 >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:26:08 EST

 >>>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch@grassyhill.com>
 >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:09 -700


 >If he was so eager to collect that reward, why didn't he bring
 >those two small bundles with him to show what he had found? That
 >would have been the logical thing to do.

A good question - one that we will never know the answer to. But
that is the way it happened.

 >Furthermore, under Ramey's orders, Marcel told a story of
 >Brazel's find, which you will find detailed in numerous AP
 >stories. Brazel had first gathered up the material and thrown it
 >under some brush. Brazel first heard of the saucers in Corona on
 >Saturday night, and then immediately rushed back to "dig up" the
 >material first thing Sunday (I'm not making this up). According
 >to Brazel this was 8 miles from his ranch house, so some effort
 >would have been involved in retrieving this.

Notice the spin - he "rushed back". If you stood to gain a fair
bit of loot for some otherwise irritating 'junk', what=92s 8 miles
got to do with it?

 >Then after "rushing back" to recover his find some distance from
 >his ranch house, what does Brazel do? Does he immediately go to
 >Roswell. No, he waits another day, according to the story. More
 >astoundingly, he fails to take those bundles with him to show
 >what he has found after rushing back and going out of his way to
 >get them.

 >How believable is this fable?

Despite your spinning, more believable than your version.

BTW - he waited until Monday because Brazel was a practical man.
So long as he had to go to Roswell, he might as well take care
of business matters as well, and Roswell was closed on Sunday.
He was not in a rush, as you are vainly trying to spin it.

<snip>

 >Brazel _explicitly_
 >disavowed ever thinking it was a weather device in the Daily
 >Record article. Yet the Sheriff claimed Brazel came in saying he
 >thought it might be a "weather meter."

If Brazel was trying to turn in a solution to the Flying Disk
hoopla, he hardly would want to admit the people who might write
checks that he really thought it was a "weather meter". He did
mention this to his friend, Wilcox, but not to the RDR.

 >Sheriff Wilcox, when pushed for a more detailed description by
 >somebody from AP, declined to answer, saying he was "working
 >with those fellows at the base." AP reporter Jason Kellahin
 >likewise said Wilcox (whom he knew well) wouldn't discuss the
 >matter with him because the military had told him not to talk
 >about it.

If you were a military man just informed by the sheriff that
someone had come in with pieces of a Flying Disk, your first (or
second) comment to him would be to please not discuss this with
the press until we had a chance to look over the claim. Marcel
would have thought of this. Really sinister, eh?

<snip>

 >>I find it curious that Shandara, who was working to prove the
 >>UFO hypothesis, gets such short shrift from you and Kevin. I
 >>wonder what your opinions would be of his account if he had
 >>published the exact opposite - without supporting tapes. But
 >>here we have a fellow that is working hard to get a different
 >>answer from Col DuBose, and got the "wrong" answer. It is to his
 >>credit that he published his notes anyway, even if it was
 >>detrimental to his case.

 >His and Moore's "cause" at the time was to prove that this was
 >the real Roswell debris. Lo and behold, Shandera claims Dubose
 >confirms in his interview that this was the real debris from
 >Roswell, in contradiction to every other interview Dubose ever
 >did. What a coincidence!

 From Phil Klass: "An article by Shandera, published in the Jan.
1991 issue of the _MUFON UFO Journal_, flatly contradicted
things that DuBose (then nearly 90 years old) earlier told
Randle and Schmitt. Don Ecker, Research Director for UFO
Magazine, told me (Klass) that DuBose had also told him
contradictory stories during two interviews in a single day."

<snip>

 >>And despite your research that shows the Southwest was lousy
 >>with Rawins, nothing you have turned up indicates that Marcel
 >>had knowledge of them. When he found the stuff, he was intrigued
 >>and curious "he tried to make a kite".

 >Nothing you have turned up indicates he wasn't. Can you explain
 >to us how you know for a fact that Marcel didn't know about
 >radar targets or even ordinary rubber weather balloons? Is this
 >another of those amazing debunker psychic abilities where they
 >hold seances with he dead or use remote viewing to follow people
 >around in the past every moment of their lives to determine what
 >they did or did not know?

Ooooo - great spin there, David! From the sarcasm, I can only
assume that your point is that the UFO proponent camp has the
patent on communing with the dead, thus your flat assurance that
we can take it as a matter of fact that Marcel was intimately
acquainted with Rawins- indeed, as was most of the military
world at that time.

 >I have already pointed out that one of Marcel's MOS's was radar
 >intelligence officer=85.

Marcel was primarily the Photo Intelligence Officer, the guy
responsible for interpretation of photo recon and bomb damage
assessment. He was trained as a cartographer in the oil
industry, where he used aerial photos to evaluate potential
drilling sites.

He had taken a month long radar intelligence course, but that
was in the theory and use of an _airborne_ radar set, the
AN/APS- 15A. This course would _not_ have covered the deployment
or use of Rawins- they would not be useful to an airborne radar
system. So please point out where this course had anything to do
with meteorological equipment.

 >Besides this misses the major point. All anybody had to know was
 >that these were ordinary materials, recognizable to the average
 >5 year old: rubber balloons, Scotch tape, tinfoil, paper, and
 >balsa wood used to make kites. No average person, much less a
 >trained intelligence officer, would ever jump to the conclusion
 >that this was anything like the reported flying saucers flying
 >at supersonic speeds.

This is your assumption, which is convenient if you want to
support the 'alien spaceship' story. However, couple the known
facts with the Mac Brazel interview, Bessie=92s memories and the
basic descriptions of the other First Witnesses, and an entirely
different story emerges. Comes down to whose 30-40 year old
memories you want to trash, doesn=92t it.

 >>Press release hits papers - Ramey notified. Ramey talks to his
 >>staff, and Blanchard (and/or Marcel, Cavitt, etc) via phone.
 >>Descriptions are made, and a consensus is arrived at that it
 >>looks like a wrecked radar target. Marcel and debris are ordered
 >>to Ft Worth to confirm tentative identification, and to give
 >>better credence to all future press releases.

 >>While Ramey waits, phones are ringing off the hook. Ramey,
 >>Kirton, and possibly others take a few of the calls and calm
 >>some semi-hysterical reporters with the tentative
 >>identification.

 >>Sure the above is speculation, but it fits how intelligent men
 >>would have handled such a situation, fits the available
 >>evidence,

 >Nice try, but displays your usual disregard of details. There
 >would be no time for this _after_ the release hit the wires.
 >From the moment the story became public to when Newton's
 >official ID went out was only three hours. Photos were being
 >taken within two hours, and Ramey was claiming the debris was
 >already in his office barely an hour later.

Which gives Ramey and staff an hour to field those phone calls.
IIRC, the release hit the wires at about 3:30. Give the papers a
moment or two to digest the news, and the phones FW were giving
out busy signals by 3:40. Plenty of time to field a few calls.

 >So unless the 8th AAF had one of those supersonic saucers at
 >their disposal all prepped and ready to go, your scenario is not
 >only impossible, it's ridiculous.

Well, by your lights, of course it is. Meanwhile, you are very
comfortable with Ramey and company having scads of time to
determine- strictly verbally by phone, mind you- that this
mysterious wreckage bears an uncanny resemblance to a
deteriorated neoprene balloon and a shredded Rawin- a device
that everyone is, of course, familiar with. Calls to friends
from at various bases eventually produces the requisite
substitute ("just happen to have one in stock, general! Nicely
aged just two to three weeks, too!") and it is flown to FW for
the sham photos. During their spare time, Ramey and staff can
concoct the conspiracy of silence that still exists, no doubt
covering all the various things that can, and usually do go
wrong. And so, by 4:30, the whole apparatus in place, ready to
bamboozle the public.

Yeah, timing is everything!

<snip>

 >>and is supported by later missives from Twining and
 >>Schulgen, who knew that the U.S. did not have any crashed alien
 >>ships.

 >Why would there be any mention of "crashed alien ships" in
 >documents classified at a lower level than "Top Secret"?

Ahhh - subject matter for a new thread someday!

 >Besides
 >Schulgen never brought this up in his "missives." This seems to
 >be another of your usual inventions of "facts."

Curiously, the dog didn=92t bark.

 >>>On the other hand, most of what Marcel recounted in his
 >>>interviews tracked quite well with what can be determined from
 >>>his military file, news articles of the day, and interviews with
 >>>other witnesses. Marcel's story has a lot of corroborating
 >>>evidence.

 >>Most? Pilot? Air Ace with 5 kills? Degree from Georgetown?

 >Yes indeed most. Most of Marcel's so-called "lies" are flagrant
 >misrepresentations of Marcel's record and words, originally
 >started by Robert Todd, but continuing into the present,
 >including by you in your misrepresentation of his evaluation by
 >Blanchard.

Misrepresent? What is being misrepresented here is Marcel=92s
service record, and the guy doing it is Jessie himself. Robert
Todd just did the research to see if Marcel=92s claims were true.
They weren=92t. That is not "misrepresentation", that is good
research.

 >As to the "pilot", "5 kills" and degree from Georgetown, all
 >this stems from one hasty, incompletely transcribed interview by
 >Bob Pratt, assumption of 100% accuracy in that existing
 >transcription (Ever done a transcription from tape? Words get
 >garbled and are difficult to interpret, inflections can get lost
 >in print, and inappropriate punctuation can get added, all of
 >which can alter the intended meaning), and finally debunker
 >propaganda spin.

Ohhhh, goody. Now you are trying to trash a tape you have never
heard, and a transcription that was done by the person who was
sitting with Marcel when he uttered his claims. That is so
patently ridiculous.

Up to this point, your assumptions, contentions and spinning
showed a great deal of research, and attention to detail.
Commendable. Don=92t destroy the illusion with this inane
flopping around. Marcel made these claims to Pratt. Deal with
Marcel=92s propensity to stretch the truth, not Pratt=92s
hypothetical =93bad tape=94.

 >I can't get into this in great detail, but very briefly:

 >"Pilot": Marcel _never_ claimed to be an Air Force pilot, only
 >an intelligence officer.

Bull. He told Pratt he had been a pilot since 1928 with over
3,000 hours of flying time.

 >All he ever said
 >about this was that he "WAS" the bomb wing intelligence officer
 >(fact) and flew at times "AS" (not that he "was") a pilot on the
 >bombing missions (for non-rated personnel to occasionally fly
 >co-pilot is a lot more common than debunkers will acknowledge

Again, bull. It was common practice for everyone to learn a
little about each other=92s job, including rudimentary flying
lessons. This was done for a practical reason- if one person was
killed or disabled, another might be able to step in and take
over. Basic flying lessons were common, as everyone should at
least know how to try and get the plane back to a safe area
before bailing out. Nothing exciting there, and few hours of
stick time (with the real pilot sitting in the other chair)
hardly qualifies Jessie as a =93pilot=94.

 >"Air Ace with 5 kills:" Except for Pratt's interview, nobody can
 >recall Marcel ever making the claim that he received "five air
 >medals because I shot down five enemy aircraft in combat."
 >Marcel's son, e.g., remembers him claiming to have shot down
 >only one. Marcel's record shows two air medals, during his
 >combat bombing missions under fire (as stated in the wording of
 >the air medals), so his claim of taking over the waist gun from
 >a dead gunner and shooting down one Japanese plane is not out of
 >the question. Air medals can be issued for singular acts of
 >merit (though Robert Todd _falsely_ claimed they were issued
 >only for lengthy air service.)

Here is the citation from the first of Jessie=92s Two (2) Air
Medals:

"For meritorious achievement while participating in sustained
operational flight missions from 4 December 1943 to 28 April
1944 in the Southern Pacific area during which hostile contact
was probable and expected. These operations consisted of bombing
missions against enemy airdromes and installations and attacks
on enemy naval vessels and shipping. The courage and devotion to
duty displayed during these flights are worthy of commendation."

The second is identical, except for the dates of service.
Strictly boilerplate, and issued to note that he served
honorably, and survived.

As for Robert Todd, you owe him an apology. He never made the
claim you ascribed to him. I did a quick search through his
writings, and what he did say was:

"In fact, the citations [for Marcel's two Air Medals] make it
clear the medals were awarded because Marcel had flown on enough
combat missions for enough hours to qualify for the awards."
_The KowPflop Quarterly_ 12/8/95

If the Air Medals were awarded for anything out of the ordinary,
such as his =93shooting down five enemy airplanes=94, the citations
would have noted that. The claim of being awarded =935 Air Medals=94
for shooting down the enemy is Marcel=92s invention, not reality.
Your Magic Wand cannot change that.

<snip>

 >Conclusion: Who knows? Perhaps
 >it was a one-time boast, but given the lack of boasting by
 >Marcel about the rest of his medals, I think it more likely was
 >a Pratt transcription error.

Yeah, right.

 >"Degree from Georgetown:" This is the only interview where the
 >subject of Marcel's education came up. Pratt's transcript has an
 >unusual amount of garbling here, the original transcript
 >reading:

 >  ...degree in nuclear physics (bachelors) at completed work at
 >  GW Univ in Wash. attended (LSU, Houston, U of Wis, NY Univ,
 >  Ohio, docotr pool? and GW...)"

 >This doesn't even look like direct quoting anymore, but
 >something assembled from notes. It was obvious Pratt was having
 >difficulty understanding what was being said and it comes off as
 >ambiguous in part. Did Marcel say he got a degree from GWU or
 >just that he completed work there?

=93Attended=94 or =93Graduated=94, GWU never heard of him. And I suppose
you have some Magic Spin Dust you can use to explain away the
comments like =93degree=94, =93bachelors=94? Face it, this is just
another fabrication from Maj Marcel.

 >Did he actually say he
 >physically "attended" the universities Pratt listed in
 >parentheses?

He also said on his military personnel file that he spent a year
at LSU. They never heard of him either.

(more futile spinning snipped)

 >=85 and Marcel could have walked over there
 >in 5 minutes after work, maybe just audited it to learn more to
 >do his job better.

That is not what he said. It is possible that that is exactly
what Marcel did do, but it is not what he told Pratt.

<snip>

 >>Final point - Maj. Marcel was not a stupid person. He was
 >>reasonably intelligent, and a competent officer.

 >Typical backhanded compliment, but reasonably accurate. Indeed
 >he was not a stupid person. Most who knew him considered him
 >highly intelligent. Even Cavitt spontaneously mentioned this in
 >his A.F. interview. And here's a sample comment from his
 >evaluator when he was with the Special Weapons Project. He
 >wrote, "He is a very intelligent officer and has a very wide
 >range of capabilities. He has had experience in the intelligence
 >field in almost all its aspects from the lowest to the highest
 >limits. He has an excellent technical background [where did he
 >get it?], is a first class cartographer, draftsman, illustrator,
 >and presentation man."

In other words (in a backhanded way), what I said.

 >>He was also impulsive, and had a good imagination.

 >As seems to be your habit, you are just making this up.

Nope- as you pointed out some paragraphs below,

 >Blanchard
 >wrote, "his only known weakness is an inclination to magnify
 >problems he is confronted with."

Symptoms of a person that is impulsive and has a good
imagination.

<snip>

 >>He simply was taken up
 >>with the press reports of all these Flying Disks, and then
 >>suddenly the possessor of some strange debris that he did not
 >>recognize. He thought he had solved the mystery, and proceeded
 >>with that assumption.

 >No matter how you try to spin things, nothing about a rubber
 >balloon or balsa/tinfoil radar kite was "strange." All of it was
 >material kids would recognize. Also it doesn't exactly jibe with
 >Blanchard's actual superior rating of Marcel's ability to arrive
 >at logical conclusions, does it?

On the contrary - the nation=92s papers were abuzz with the news
about Flying Disks. Confronted with the debris, Marcel used his
imagination and made, for him, a logical deduction.

 >Now let's address the one slightly negative comment in
 >Blanchard's spring 1948 evaluation, since debunkers like Bruce
 >claim this demonstrates that Marcel "imagined" things. Blanchard
 >wrote, "his only known weakness is an inclination to magnify
 >problems he is confronted with."

 >To the debunkers, who with their remarkable psychic abilities
 >know all about Marcel, Blanchard is specifically referring to
 >the Roswell incident.

You did not get that from me. I assumed that Blanchard was
taking about his subordinate in general, evaluating his overall
performance. That it also applies to The Incident is
interesting.

 >But if that were the case, why does
 >Blanchard elsewhere in the evaluation note Marcel's maturity,
 >coolness, businesslike demeanor, logical conclusions, good
 >judgment, etc.? That is totally inconsistent with Marcel being
 >"impulsive" with an overactive imagination, being swept away by
 >flying saucer hysteria and "magnifying" "strange debris" like
 >rubber, balsa, paper, tinfoil, and Scotch tape into a "not of
 >this Earth" flying saucer.

Not at all. If Marcel were sometimes =93inclined=94 to exhibit this
behavior, this would not necessarily affect his performance when
crunch time came. We all know people who sometimes are a little
overly emotional, or occasionally give in to rash impulses,
except when on the job. Marcel was one of those people.

 >If you want to get an accurate portrayal of what Blanchard
 >probably was describing, then you should place the comment in
 >the context of the _entire_ evaluation

I have, which is precisely why I mentioned that Marcel was a
competent officer.

<snip>

 >(That's what's great about armchair psychobabble evaluations of
 >other people. You can twist and mold them into any grotesque
 >caricature of a person you want, just like some crooked DA
 >trying to railroad somebody into prison.)

You=92ve just used your Magic Wand rather copiously in a futile
attempt to blame Marcel=92s boasting on Pratt. If a =93grotesque
caricature=94 of Marcel emerged from all this, it is primarily due
to all of your flailing about.


Regards,


Bruce Hutchinson








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                 The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:12:19 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:24:16 -0500
Subject: The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids

On The Morality Of Lizards And Other Insectoids **

There I was, cutting the hedges with an electric hedge cutter.
It was about 1954 or close... not sure... and it was my job to
do this. I had an uncle who was an artist, and shaped the hedges
into a gorgeous design. All's I hadda do was follow the lines of
his design and trim.

Our hedges were not only beautifully shaped and always in near
perfect condition, but there were also a whole lot of them
around our home in the Bronx. I didn't mind doing this job and I
didn't mind tending the lawns which were also a lot, something
like 5,000 square feet. And there was no electric or any other
powered mower, just me.

Anyway, them hedges had a great many little critters living in
and among the leaves. I often wondered what they all did there.
When I spent some time during summer vacations, looking at those
critters, I figgered out a lot. I figgered that the ants were
looking for the sweet nectar as well as the pieces of leaves cut
and stuck on and in the hedge branches. And the spider webs were
a gas to study too. In the morning they were highly visible,
dripping with dew. As the sun came up it dried the dew and I
would be able to see how that little critter worked. He was a
wily little bastard. I never liked him. He would lurk somewhere
near his work and hide whilst patiently awaiting some innocent
little ant or other small insect to get itself stuck in his web.
God that was such a complicated web too. And it never took long
for the spider to recreate it after I'd demolished it with my
trusty hedge cutter.

Anyway, once the little critter got stuck in the web, the spider
would smile (you could almost see that smirk) and say (in spider
tongue which is similar to Hungarian)... the spider would shout,
"Holy sh*t, _LUNCH!_" and proceed to the scene of the carnage,
wrap the critter in a bundle like the giant ants did in "Them"
and stick or inject or whatever, something into them to begin
the painful process of digestion, even before the spider sucked
out the juices.

Ah, but then there was the praying mantis. I was told never to
touch or kill this thingie because they ate bugs. And the bugs
they ate were bad bugs. This is also true of Lady Bugs. But I am
not certain of the truth of whether the mantis really eats the
bad guys.

It was the praying mantis which frightened me terribly. I think
it was because the insect's face and shape of eyes reminded me
of some insectoid and/or lizard-like alien entity I perceive to
have interacted with. As I mentioned on the phone the other day
to a researcher, I cannot look at the face (head on) of a sea
turtle either. Same reason.

And Budd Hopkins has two cats, Siamese I think, which really
bother me. It always seems to be the eyes.

Again you aks, "What's the point?" OK, I see the validity of
your queery. Well, allow me to sip my Barbara's best coffee in
the whole world. There, I fell much better now.

Well, the answer is, when you see a bug, you really don't know
if it's a good bug or a bad bug. And you really (if you are a
perceived abductee) don't know if he's gonna eat you, suck your
body fluids or just punish you for being in his (or her) way.
That one time I saw a mantis do something bad was when she (on
the bottom, I like it that way too) had this guy mantis on top.
Even to my very young mind, I knew they were doing the nasty.
Anyway, they were doing the nasty for a long, long, long time. I
always admired the guy for that ability, you know?

I digress.

The female, after she was sure she got all she needed, turned
her head around and began _eating_ her mate. And after all that
great, and very long sex, not to mention her obvious multiple...
uh, them's! Imagine all that time and all that fun and then, she
eats the poor guy all up? Just like a woman, eh?

This really did fascinate me until I grew up. It was then I
realized that having good sex is a lot like getting, uh, 'four
letter worded'! The only difference is that when you get the
former, you expect a hearty, "Gee, that was great, thank you."
And getting the latter you get eaten up... head first.  The most
nutritious part. Then, you get smart and stay away from
predators who like to live with their pray. And the last part of
this, today's lesson, is that when you get some, you know,
always stare at the mouth. It might turn into a mantis, a gray,
a man in woman's cloth, or worse, someone who would drag
pleasure from you and then eat your brain for your trouble,
pleasure and knowledge. Such is the life of one who perceives
that he is an abductee.

End of lesson.

** "Extracted from a monograph by Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt,
entitled, "It's my mind, leave me alone with 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                          Secrecy News -- 01/31/02

From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@fas.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:28:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:12:54 -0500
Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/31/02


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2002, Issue No. 11
January 31, 2002


**      THE RETURN OF SPACE NUCLEAR REACTORS
**      REDUCING INTERAGENCY BARRIERS IN INTELLIGENCE
**      OFFICIAL RESOURCES
**      (TIME OUT)


THE RETURN OF SPACE NUCLEAR REACTORS

For the first time in a decade, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration will request funding for development of a
space nuclear reactor in the 2003 budget request to be released
next week.

Space nuclear reactor technology has followed a boom-and-bust
pattern of development since the 1950s. The U.S. launched one
space reactor in 1965, a 500 Watt system that operated for 43
days and which remains in orbit. The last U.S. space reactor
development program, a joint NASA-Defense Department effort
known as the SP-100, was terminated ten years ago following the
expenditure of nearly half a billion dollars.

(The Soviet Union around 30 reactors between 1967 and 1988. The
U.S. has launched some two dozen spacecraft utilizing
plutonium-powered electrical generators -- which are not
reactors -- that produce a low level of electricity, for
missions such as the Cassini probe to Saturn in 1995.)

NASA is proposing the new reactor initiative in order to support
future space exploration programs, an informed official said. He
noted uncertainty about the viability of the program in the
current budgetary environment. He also expressed concern about
possible attempts to involve the Defense Department in the
program, fearing such a move might make it more vulnerable to
political opposition.

The use of space nuclear reactors is dictated whenever moderate
levels of electrical power (tens of kilowatts or more) are
required in space over an extended period of time. The
availability of a space nuclear reactor could enable a variety
of ambitious space exploration programs such as a multi-decade
mission beyond our solar system.

By the same token, space reactors could also be used to power
space weapons and other military systems in orbit, attracting
the opposition of some arms control advocates and
environmentalists.

In an attempt to square this circle, the Federation of American
Scientists and Soviet colleagues in 1988 proposed a ban on the
operation of nuclear reactors in Earth orbit that would
nevertheless permit their use for space exploration.

See "Nuclear Power in Space," Scientific American, June 1991,
for background on the checkered history of space reactors and
discussion of the FAS proposal.

For some reason there has recently been a small surge of policy
interest in space nuclear power, independent of the new NASA
initiative.

"Thermionics Quo Vadis?" is the curious title of a new National
Research Council report on the status of thermionics, which is
an energy conversion technology used in some space reactor
designs. The report provides some general information on space
nuclear power. See:

http://www.nap.edu/books/030908282X/html/

The Department of Energy Inspector General reported this month
on the administration of DOE's Advanced Radioisotope Power
Systems program, which provides plutonium-powered electrical
generators for NASA missions. See:

http://www.ig.doe.gov/pdf/ig-0540.pdf


REDUCING INTERAGENCY BARRIERS IN INTELLIGENCE

One of the perennial defects of U.S. intelligence has been the
bureaucratic friction among its various member agencies that
tended to impede cooperation and the achievement of common
goals.

In order to diminish barriers among intelligence agencies and to
enhance coordination, the Intelligence Community now requires
officials to serve for a period of time in an intelligence
agency other than their own as a condition of advancement to
senior positions.

This personnel exchange policy is intended "to develop the
future leadership of the Intelligence Community" and "to promote
a wider understanding of IC missions and functions; bolster IC
coordination; and enhance the effectiveness of the Community,"
according to an official directive issued in February 2000.

See Director of Central Intelligence Directive 1/4 on
"Intelligence Community Officer Programs" here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/dcid1-4.htm

The policy was initiated in 1997 and has been put into practice
on a growing scale ever since. Last year there were
approximately 900 slots throughout the Intelligence Community
for such rotational assignments.

One Air Force implementation of this Community-wide program was
recently described here:

http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/cp/icp/ico.htm


OFFICIAL RESOURCES

The head of the General Accounting Office yesterday explained
the GAO's decision to pursue litigation against the Bush
Administration in order to gain access to records of the Vice
President's Energy Task Force.

"Were the Vice President's arguments in this case [against
disclosure] to prevail, any administration seeking to insulate
its activities from oversight and public scrutiny could do so
simply by assigning those activities to the Vice President or a
body under the White House's direct control," wrote Comptroller
General David M. Walker.

A copy of the GAO statement is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/gao013002.html

The latest public report from the CIA on "[Foreign] Acquisition
of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and
Advanced Conventional Munitions" was released on January 30. A
copy is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/bian_jan_2002.htm

The Treasury Department announced a series of steps to increase
the "transparency" of global financial systems. See "Treasury
Strengthens Transparency on Global Standards":

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2002/01/tr013002.html

Sen. John Edwards this week introduced the "Cyberterrorism
Preparedness Act of 2002," a bill intended to improve computer
security against cyberterrorism and cybercrime. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s1900.html


(TIME OUT)

Secrecy News will not be published for the next two weeks.
Publication will resume during the week of February 18.


******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
majordomo@lists.fas.org with this command in the body of the
message:

subscribe secrecy_news

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

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

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:  www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

                           Re: Manned V-1's - Hall

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:40:54 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:15:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Manned V-1's - Hall


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: Manned V-1's
 >Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 14:23:44 -0600

 >>From: Steven J. Dunn <SDunn@northropgrumman.com>
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Manned V-1's
 >>Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:26:14 -0800

 >>The Germans never intended to developed 'Kamakazi' V-1's. That
 >>kind of thing wasn't in their culture. The manned V-1s were
 >>intended to find out why the unmanned ones kept crashing before
 >>they were supposed to. Worked, too.

 >Gordon Cooper tells an interesting tale in 'Leap of Faith', pp.
 >153-154, recounting what he says he heard from Joaquin 'Jack'
 >Keutner, whom he worked with on the Mercury-Redstone rocket.

 >In an attempt to improve accuracy over the target, some V-1s
 >were modified with a cockpit to allow for a pilot, Jack had
 >flown several trips across the English channel atop a V-1
 >strapped under a twin-engine Junkers bomber. After being dropped
 >free, he would air-start the "Flying Bomb". When they got within
 >range of London, he would release the bomb, then turn toward the
 >French coast and ride the rocket home. Before landing, Jack
 >would dump any remaining fuel and glide the V-1, modified with
 >landing skids, to a belly landing in a field.

 >One time, things didn't go as planned. For this flight, they
 >had a two-man cockpit in a V-1, and Jack was checking out a less
 >experienced pilot. When they were dropped by the Junkers, they
 >couldn't get an air start and had to turn back toward France.
 >Jack released the warhead but was unable to dump fuel, so they
 >came in heavy, loaded with combustable fuel and at a high rate
 >of speed: in excess of 270 miles per hour. They hit the field,
 >slid its entire length, and went into a pine forest, leaving a
 >trail of burning debris behind them. The rocket disintegrated.
 >Somehow Jack got out, but the other fellow didn't.

 >At war's end, a manned V-2 was sitting on the pad at Peenemunde,
 >all tested out, fueled up, and ready to go. It would have been
 >launched on a low-energy easterly orbit, Jack explained. The
 >plan: to drop a warhead on New York City. That 1945 manned
 >rocket flight - sixteen years before the first U.S. manned
 >rocket flight - came within a week or two of being launched."

 >I guess the kindest thing to say about this silliness is that
 >Cooper must have been a sucker for wild and wooly 'war stories',
 >and it's sad he didn't know enough history and enough
 >aeronautical engineering to realize how impossible all these
 >tales were. That's assuming he actually did get these stories
 >from the German guy.


Jim,

You seem to be intent on discrediting Gordon Cooper's
credibility, based on many of your posts. Would you be willing
to go one-on-one with him in a public forum?

  - 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 > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

               Re: The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids

From: Loren Coleman <lcolema1@maine.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:49:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:19:07 -0500
Subject: Re: The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids



 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:12:19 EST
 >Subject: The Morality Of Lizards & Other Insectoids
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 >On The Morality Of Lizards And Other Insectoids **

<snip>

 >spider

<snip>

 >praying mantis which frightened me terribly. I think
 >it was because the insect's face and shape of eyes reminded me
 >of some insectoid and/or lizard-like alien entity I perceive to
 >have interacted with. As I mentioned on the phone the other day
 >to a researcher, I cannot look at the face (head on) of a sea
 >turtle either. Same reason.

 >And Budd Hopkins has two cats, Siamese I think, which really
 >bother me. It always seems to be the eyes.

 >Again you aks, "What's the point?"

<snip>

 >** "Extracted from a monograph by Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt,
 >entitled, "It's my mind, leave me alone with it!"

Of course, the whole title premise is incorrect, as lizards are
not insectoids. :-)

And neither are spiders or cats.

No wonder the aliens have a thing against all of your
ufologists. If Dr. J. Jaime Gesundt is a good example, some
folks don't even know their zoological classification
systems. :-)



Loren

still trying to understand the world through the eyes of a
cockroach






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2002 >
   Jan > Jan 31

              Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:46:15 EST
Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 21:20:37 -0500
Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman -


 >From: James Oberg <joberg@houston.rr.com>
 >To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:37:28 -0600

 >>From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 9 UFOs Caught On Video By Chilean Cameraman
 >>Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 18:28:59 -0500

 >>I could be wrong, and I'm no aeronautical expert, but I still
 >>find it hard to believe that satellites travel from north to
 >>south and vice versa.

 >Uh, this is about the easiest thing to verify. What is there
 >about it, that you seem so unwilling to accept?

 >If you have so many eyewitness reports, why don't you have the
 >simple datum about time-of-day of the incident?


Dear Mr. Oldbarge, List and of course, Errol,

What is it about the man's honest question which
you cannot answer in a civil manner?

A question is never stupid when you don't know the
answer. And here is a question which you cannot
answer, I'll bet, I'll bet, I'll bet.

What is the temperature of the sand?


Jim Mortellaro