Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 190
Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 190
Friday, March 30th 1990
Today's Topics:
Re: School?
Secrecy and secret groups
Re: Strange flash of light
Re: Strange Flash Of Light
Re: Strange flash of light
Re: Gulf Breeze
Re: Gulf Breeze photos
Re: What's New?
Re: Gulf Breeze photos
Re: Gulf Breeze
Re: Message From Don Ecker
Congrats
Re: Black Helicopters
Re: Klass acts
Re: Gulf Breeze
Re: Black Helicopters
Re: Gulf Breeze
Re: Message From Don Ecker
Re:Alien Starfighter
Re: Strange Flash Of Light
Re: Info-paranet Newsletter
Message From Don Ecker
(none)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Sandy.Barbre
Subject: Re: School?
Date: 24 Mar 90 16:22:01 GMT
So where do I find out about it?
--
Sandy Barbre - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Sandy.Barbre@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Secrecy and secret groups
Date: 24 Mar 90 17:21:00 GMT
Last night's Hard Copy had a segment on UFOs and government coverup.
I suspect most of us wouldn't have considered it worth watching, since it
actually said nothing, but at least it did make the point to the
mainstream TV watchers of the probability of a vast coverup.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Gregg.Pasterick
Subject: Re: Strange flash of light
Date: 26 Mar 90 15:10:00 GMT
Did the clipping offer any identification. There was an article
in the local paper her (Columbus, Ohio) regarding a spy satellite which
has broken up, and two pieces have already come down, but neither on
the 17th.
Gregg
--
Gregg Pasterick - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Gregg.Pasterick@f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Gregg.Pasterick
Subject: Re: Strange Flash Of Light
Date: 26 Mar 90 15:11:00 GMT
Frustrating......ain't it? Late fall and early winter was a busy
season for fireballs.......were it not for these BBS's I would've never
known.........
Gregg
--
Gregg Pasterick - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Gregg.Pasterick@f20.n3607.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f26.n123.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Komar
Subject: Re: Strange flash of light
Date: 27 Mar 90 01:44:00 GMT
In a message to John Komar <03-26-90 08:10> Gregg Pasterick wrote:
GP=> Did the clipping offer any identification. There was
GP=>an article in the local paper her (Columbus, Ohio)
GP=>regarding a spy satellite which has broken up, and two
GP=>pieces have already come down, but neither on the 17th.
GP=> Gregg
No, the clipping couls not identify the object. Still unknown.
Regards, JOhn
--
John Komar - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Komar@f26.n123.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze
Date: 26 Mar 90 22:01:00 GMT
> However, so many people in the community seemed
> to be involved, I can't just chalk it up to mass hysteria.
As I said in an earlier post, I believe that many people in the Gulf
Breeze area have seen UFOs. For reasons also mentioned, I don't
believe Ed Walters photographed the UFOs.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze photos
Date: 26 Mar 90 22:04:01 GMT
> I might change my mind but just letting
> the photo speak for itself, it says, Fake, to me.
From my knowlege of the Florida northern Gulf coast, the area is
probably relatively low old sand dunes with scrub and pines.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Re: What's New?
Date: 26 Mar 90 22:05:02 GMT
> Well John that's the description they gave privately. I just
I suppose he was giving a size reference.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze photos
Date: 26 Mar 90 22:07:03 GMT
> Photos are only records for the person who takes them, that's
> all. I wish more people believed that way, it would stop so much
> of the flak going around. Personally, I would not take any
> pictures, it only exposes you not the negative. In that I am
> positive. (Grin)
I think you're generally on the right track, but the one
conclusively unimpeachable photo is going to make a difference.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze
Date: 26 Mar 90 22:18:04 GMT
> He was very careful in not coming right out and stating that the
> pictures are of a UFO, but instead he pre-qualifies this with
> the statement that in his opinion, and based upon *available*
> information, he cannot find any ability on Ed's part to have
> been able to hoax those photographs
That's true, Maccabee did specifically state in many words that he
couldn't find solid evidence of a hoax. However, everyone had to
essentially take Ed's word that he didn't know anything about
photography.
> Bottom line....Maccabee leaves a very large chasm between his
> professional opinion of the authenticity of Ed's pictures and
> the scientific validity of the data as I could find no real body
> of scientific data to support such a blatant claim of proof of
> the UFO's existence.
True again. Maccabee essentially expressed the opinion that they
were unfaked photos of *something*, which may or may not have been a
UFO.
> Suffice it to say that Maccabee is quite credible and competent,
> and we are not implying that Maccabee is anything but
> professional, but I am at a total loss as to how Maccabee
> arrived at the conclusions that he did regarding the
> photographs.
I recall reading in Walters' book that one night Maccabee arrived at
the house in great excitement because *he* had seen an UFO. I'll have
to get the book back from the friend I loaned it to to confirm that.
If Maccabee did see a UFO, I think that would certainly influence
his conclusion.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Doug.Rogers
Subject: Re: Message From Don Ecker
Date: 28 Mar 90 00:58:29 GMT
Karen,
I, (and many other Paranet Sysops) would appreciate your using a
bit more editorial judgement in your quoting. We ask that people
quote for the sake of clarity, but not to overquote as this is simply
added expense to every single sysop in the system.
I appreciate (and frankly agree with) your comments. I just ask that
you lean a bit more lightly on the quote button.
Thanks for your understanding.
Doug Rogers
Echo Moderator
--
Doug Rogers - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Doug.Rogers@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Doug.Rogers
Subject: Congrats
Date: 28 Mar 90 01:02:28 GMT
Pleased to have you with us in an official capacity Don. Your work
(and posts) have been an integral part of Paranet for many years.
Let us know if there is anything we can do to make your job easier.
Doug
--
Doug Rogers - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Doug.Rogers@p0.f1.n606.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Linda.Murphy
Subject: Re: Black Helicopters
Date: 28 Mar 90 15:45:00 GMT
Re: Black Helicopters
How about harrassing baby bald eagles? (Maybe they didn't want some
National Park Service official to take a photograph of them in
action?)
In Flagstaff last year (got the article, but no date -- it was not
clipped with date attatched) the Arizona Republic had an article
that ends with this note:
"The Flagstaff environmentalist, John Parsons, said last week that
wildlife officials said the helicopter had attempted to land near the
nesting site. He said the Fish and Wildlife team on the ground took
photos of the helicopter."
"Parsons said there are only 16 nesting pairs of the southern
Sonoran Desert bald eagle left in the world" (Bad black helicopters!)
An official of the Prescott National Forest has confirmed that the
incident took place and said that federal officials have launched
an investigation into it."
This was an Apache attack helicopter. Federal Officials did go to
McDonnell Douglas Corp. and that the Apache flight crews were
questioned by McDonnell officials. Rob Mack then states:
"We asked them (the Federal officials) to please let us know about
this one," Mack said, referring to the nesting sight near the Verde
River."
Anyways --- around here when those big hueys decide to float around
in the sky, everyone goes out and watches them because they make so
much noise. I've only seen helicopters (military) in this area once
since I have been here, although they do appear over the Lake
Powell area with greater frequency.
Gee, make like a baby bald eagle, and maybe someone will pay
attention and demand an investigation? Shows were the interest
levels are, doesn't it?
--
Linda Murphy - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Murphy@f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Linda.Murphy
Subject: Re: Klass acts
Date: 28 Mar 90 18:29:00 GMT
RE: On BTW to Fairness
Crazy editor will only hold so much Jim... <smile> Now....
For the REST of the story... (so they can all see for themselves).
We are still in the Febuary 1987 Issue of Omni, in the Continuum
article by Jerome Clark. Here is some more goods on what you just
brought up (in all fairness).
----- Article ----
As the antinomaly hysteria has escalated, even some skeptics have
begun to express alarm. Psychologist Ray Hyman, a respected critic
of Parasychology, speaks of 'frightening funamentalism" in all this,
a "witch-hunting" mentality that has nothing to do with real science.
CSICOP cofounder Marcello Truzzi, a sociologist who left the
organization when he grew concerned that it was becoming an
"inquisitional body," says that some debunkers have gone "berserk".
Ten years later [after 1969 - skipping down a bit] the AAAS's
newly elected president, Kenneth Boulding, declaired "The evidence
of parasychology cannot just be dismissed out of hand." In recent
years polls of scientists and academics have revealedll a
considerable degree of open mindedness on the subject. And in
1976, when physicist Peter Sturrock polled the members of the
American Astronomical Society, fully 80 percent agreed the UFO
phenomenon deserves scientific attention. Serveral of the
astronomers described their own UFO sightings.
------------
(There... that is pretty much the whole story ala Jerome Clark.)
--
Linda Murphy - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Murphy@f1.n304.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze
Date: 28 Mar 90 15:17:00 GMT
That's the first time I heard he supposedly was in a fit of rage when
the "towel" photo was taken. From the appearance of the photo I got
the impression that he was just comming in from a dip in the pool and
had simply wrapped a towel around to dry off. Doesn't look like an
enraged person to me either. Also seems odd that anyone was either
ready to take a photo or that they would have bothered to apparently
take it of him rather then aiming at the UFO.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Schwartz
Subject: Re: Black Helicopters
Date: 29 Mar 90 00:14:00 GMT
Thank You! I will do so. This was real strange, and scared the piss out
of me.
--
Michael Schwartz - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Schwartz@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Novak
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze
Date: 29 Mar 90 03:31:00 GMT
Actually, his wife was taking the photos when he heard that the UFO had
returned...so she very nicely managed to frame them both in the
picture. I guess it's lucky the towel stayed up! Another note on
"behavior"...the photo of his wife dodging the blue beam bothers me a
bit too. She is supposedly running into the house after the beam has
been fired at her a couple of times already...she is for all she knows
running for her life...you'd think there'd be at least a slightly
frightened look or something,besides the strangely passive expression.
Just a thought.
--
John Novak - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Novak@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Novak
Subject: Re: Message From Don Ecker
Date: 29 Mar 90 03:48:00 GMT
In reference to the file from Don Ecker: I tend to agree with him that
it sounds suspect. A few things struck me as strange. First, it was
said that two helicopters fired missiles containing VEXXON gas 10
meters DOWNWIND of the craft. If it was 30 or so feet downwind wouldn't
the gas be blown away from the craft? The file also stated that the gas
broke down rapidly into inert substances...rapidly enough to have no
effect fired 30 feet downwind? Lets hope so since the third helicopter
apparently dropped six men at the sight "seconds later". Craft was
conveniently open yet the crew was dead at the controls? Then it was
mentioned that the craft was taken apart (I guess we know how
now...even tho it was a different type craft than the usual sightings)
even though later in the file it was stated that it was "heavily
armored with no rivets, welds or seams". They must have known just how
to do it.
Then there's the political part...which bothers me in some respects.
The Chinese are supplying long range missiles to Syria and Iraq
(according to McNeil,Lehrer Report on attempt to smuggle nuclear
detonators to Iraq) but why would "aliens" need to be allied with
them...especially in leau of such advanced weapons aboard this ship?
The plan to detonate biological weapons in the arctic to wipe out the
US and Russia seems like sheer folly to even less advanced races. (Look
what the wind did to Chernobyl fallout). Anyway...these are just a few
thoughts that came to mind...maybe just to reassure myself that this
scenario won't come true. It does make a good story though.
--
John Novak - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Novak@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!Mike.Keithly
Subject: Re:Alien Starfighter
Date: 29 Mar 90 03:31:00 GMT
The story on the starfighter was interesting but one thing baffles me
why would it take two Apache helicopters with 16 total missiles to
shoot it down,16 missiles is alot of destructive force,or were these
filled with the Vexxon.
Mike Keithly
--
Mike Keithly - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Mike.Keithly@paranet.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Re: Strange Flash Of Light
Date: 29 Mar 90 03:54:00 GMT
> Frustrating......ain't it? Late fall and early winter
> was a busy season for fireballs.......
Yeah, and stuff like this is really among the best-kept secrets of the news
services. They just don't send it out -- and if they do, it rarely gets
picked up anywhere. At least, that is what I hope is the case.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@paranet.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Re: Info-paranet Newsletter
Date: 29 Mar 90 04:17:00 GMT
> Neural prostheses are certainly possible, silicon
> is inert compared to AlGaAsP. Implantation would be most
> effective right after birth so that the nervous system
> could make the connections and "learn" to use the information in
> the chip.
Very well thought-out reply, John! For the record, in my post on the
possibilities of digital-neural nets (let's coin a phrase, shall we? --
DNNs?), I was theorizing only on the creation of digital interfaces for
motor functions. So I was only contemplating outside intervention -- or
"programming" of gross motor functions or involuntary functions. For
instance, bridging or shorting the Vegas nerve to create cardiac events.
I agree that the brain does seem to "hardwire" itself -- indeed, it rewires
itself over & over again like an amazing biological breadboard. Thus direct
intervention in higher neural processes must await an understanding of how
the brain's higher neural net works & reconfigures itself.
Indeed, if it is ever possible to intervene in higher thought processes (or
perceptions), it may only be possible to do so on an individual basis.
I.e.: an individual brain must be studied to determine the unique
characteristics of its neural net, and then the intervention would have to
be individualized to the subject.
I must admit that for all of these reasons, I believe that Dr. Vallee is
correct in is theory that "reality distortions" typical of UFO experiences
are the result of something other than an "sphere" or other such implant.
The phenomena may be the result of radiation or other electromagnetic means
that are used to disrupt or scramble the brain's neural nets, altering
perceptions. But such perceptual alterations would probably not be
predictable or controllable, except in very general terms. Indeed, they
might be more like a dream or nightmare, where the brain confabulates
experiences or sensations to "fill in" what the body feels, tastes, etc.
If spheres or other implants play any role in this process, it would
probably only be as some kind of focusing point for outside radiation
-- or possibly as a relay or resonator for such radiation. Vallee is
particularly interested in pulsed microwaves, which we already know can
produce some of the disorientation and hallucinations described by UFO
witnesses. Check out Confrontations.
Gotta go!
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@paranet.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f102.n268.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Paul.Faeder
Subject: Message From Don Ecker
Date: 29 Mar 90 04:32:00 GMT
In a message of <24 Mar 90 15:56:00>, Michael Corbin (1:104/422) writes:
> The Alledged C/R of the 11/89 "Alien Starfighter"
>The ZOMBIES have been programmed to help overthrow Mankind in the
>near future. When China finishes with Israel it will invade
>Europe. At the same time Chinese spacebased bacteriological
>weapons will be launched at the Arctic. The winds will carry the
>diseases into Russia and North America. In days 100's of millions
>will be dead, survivors will have to deal with Chinese, aliens, and
>the ZOMBIES.
Since Peking is about the same latitude as NYC, NY, I wonder how this
spacebased bacterial weapon will avoid China and the implanted HUMAN zombies?
>The alien forces with their Chinese and Arab allies will attack
>within the next 5 years. Waiting longer than that would make it
>impossible even for the aliens to reverse the ecological damage
>inflicted on the Earth by Man.
If these ET's are so angered by man's ecological damage to the Earth, then why
would they choose to use nuclear weapons?
--
Paul Faeder - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Paul.Faeder@p0.f102.n268.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f102.n268.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Paul.Faeder
Subject: (none)
Date: 29 Mar 90 04:33:24 GMT
In an article of <27 Mar 90 00:49:00 GMT>, lll-winken!well!ddrasin writes:
>c) Invocation of well-known details from other types of cases (this
>"starfighter" just happened to be carrying a supply of brain
>implants!)
They're kept in the glove compartment next to the spare fuses :-) (sorry
couldn't resist).
You make some good points. It inspired me to go back and read the original
message and take a more critical look at it.
>f) Details that don't seem to jibe, for example "muscular" grey-white-
>skinned reptoids, like "others recovered in previous operations."
>Huh? Hm.... never heard these types described as "muscular" before...
I never heard of these either. This letter also described them as "fetus
heads" or something similar. What do they mean by this? Large skulled?
>g) Carelessness. You'd explode gas missiles *upwind* of the target,
>not downwind.
I missed this one, had to go back and re-read it. Is there such a gas as
VEXXON?
>Of course it might essentially be true, but poorly reported, or
>embroidered along the way for one reason or another, or... well, who
>knows?
Well I don't know. Of course if someone in that area can access a newspaper
and confirm reports of a road closing. If there was no reported closing then
that kinda puts the lid on this.
Wouldn't there be any residual effects of this VEXXON gas that could be
measured? Such as dead animals or people?
--
Paul Faeder - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Paul.Faeder@p0.f102.n268.z1.FIDONET.ORG
********To have your comments in the next issue, send electronic mail to********
'infopara' at the following address:
UUCP {ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara
DOMAIN infopara@scicom.alphacdc.com
ADMIN Address infopara-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
{ncar,isis,boulder}!scicom!infopara-request
******************The**End**of**Info-ParaNet**Newsletter************************
