Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 240
Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 240
Friday, June 8th 1990
Today's Topics:
Guatemala UFO Video
Re: serious heat
Re: Inside Edition
Re: PROJBETA.UFO
Re: Bob Lazar
UFO Questionnaire
UFO Questionaire
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: Guatemala UFO Video
Date: 4 Jun 90 06:06:00 GMT
I was reviewing the tape of "UFO Cover-Up Live" today (my 11-year-old wanted
to see it) and a particular sequence jumped out at me. I've seen the Guatemala
video any number of times in the past and was never real impressed with it, so
I guess I never paid it much attention. But my daughter got excited over it,
so I ran it in slo-mo, and damned if that ain't a peculiar object! I always
thought that it could be an airplane - its too far away to say that it ISN'T
shaped like one - but upon review, the thing slows to an almost standstill,
then rotates about 60 degrees to starboard and takes off again!
For those of you who haven't seen it, it was shot by a video crew setting up
to film a commercial. We see them pan the camera up over a building into a
thatch of trees, then up comes this object over the trees at a pretty fair
height, but below the cloud cover, and yes, I'd have to say its going pretty
fast, then - and this is the part I never really noticed - it slows down with
a deceleration that would flat-out kill a man, then turns right and shoots
away. I think what prevented me from noticing it before is the fact that the
camera turns a little and zooms in, and so the effects of the aerodynamics are
not as visible immediately. But if you keep your eye on the clouds, the object
definitely almost stops, and definitely shoots off in another direction. Its
obviously metallic, and the sun glints off it at different angles as the thing
maneuvers. Quite a sight!
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: Re: serious heat
Date: 4 Jun 90 19:01:00 GMT
For those of you who may be following things on FIDO, here is another snatch of
disinformation from TSB.
> There is already a file available from FOIA that states that several
> SPs, at the perimeter of Fort Dix, shot an alien, it died and then
> another alien shot back with a hand held beam weapon and melted one iof
> their rifles. I'm not going to waste time debating this. If you happen
> to be a newcomer, then get the files from somewhere and read them and
> get the videotapes from somewhere and watch them. Dont bother attacking
> me for making wild statements. As any pro in this field knows, the Fort
> Dix report has been verified from FOIA.
Mr. Bennett misspeaks. As far as I know, nothing regarding the Ft. Dix incident
has been verified by the FOIA. The source was an anonymous airman who contacted
Len Stringfield. The case is highly dubious, as the 1569 form was improperly
filled out; and no one has ever stepped forward, either overtly or anonymously,
to verify the story.
I just thought ParaNet members would be interested in the less fanciful version
of the story. Apparently the FIDO members are not. I guess all is as it should
be. <sigh>
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:209/722
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: Inside Edition
Date: 5 Jun 90 02:48:00 GMT
Was it clear from the article that Teller understood why he was being
asked about Lazar and if so were there any questions to Teller
concerning the goings on in Area 51?
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:209/722
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Daniel.Wisnosky
Subject: Re: PROJBETA.UFO
Date: 4 Jun 90 22:22:18 GMT
Allright, thanx a lot Jim! I'll be sure to take a look at that. I just
want to be sure that I got all my facts straight about Mr. Cooper
instead of just jumping on the let's lynch Cooper bandwagon :)
C ya,
Dan
--
Daniel Wisnosky - via FidoNet node 1:209/722
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Daniel.Wisnosky@f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Tim.Hamewka
Subject: Re: Bob Lazar
Date: 5 Jun 90 01:52:33 GMT
The article has already been typed up and loaded to Jeff. I'll leave
him a message to send it to you.
--
Tim Hamewka - via FidoNet node 1:209/722
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Tim.Hamewka@f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gene Gross <gross@dg-rtp.dg.com>
Subject: UFO Questionnaire
Date: 5 Jun 90 21:20:17 GMT
Subject: UFO Questionaire
Before I answer, I want to thank Mike for starting this thread. Since
I've been on ParaNet (and I've enjoyed every minute of it), I have
wanted to engage in some really serious discussions of what we know and
don't know; what we have evidence for and what we don't. It seemed to
me that it was all too easy to get stuck in one thing or another without
knowing what the boundaries are. I hope that this thread blossoms and
we begin to clearly delineate the boundaries of the known and unknown.
This would help focus our research efforts.
-------------------------------------------------------
# 1. Some flying saucers have tried to communicate with us.
Probably true. I say probably true only because I have not personally
experienced such attempts at communication that I am aware of. However,
others have reported such attempts, and I have no reason to doubt their
veracity.
# 2. All UFO reports can be explained either as well understood
# happenings or as hoaxes.
Definitely false. If I were to make an extremely conservative estimate
of the percentage of sightings that remain unexplained at 1%, that is
far too many unexplained sightings for my tastes. However, I suspect,
based upon what I've read, that the actual percentage is far higher, on
the order of roughly 20% (one fifth).
# 3. The Air Force has done an adequate job of investigation of
# UFO reports and UFOs generally.
Definitely false. I'm sure that the USAF and the
other governmental groups investigating UFOs have done a good job
internally. But as for the information released to the public, their
records is far from shining.
# 4. No actual, physical evidence has ever been obtained from a UFO.
Probably false. I can neither prove nor disprove this one. Some
evidence seems to suggest that physical evidence of some sort exists.
But I have not found anything concrete enough that would stand a
rigorous scientific examination.
# 5. A government agency maintains a Top Secret file of UFO
# reports that are deliberately withheld from the public.
Definitely true. I have seen enough evidence to convince me of this
one.
# 6. No airline pilots have seen UFOs.
Definitely false. I have on tape an interview with the flight crew of a
commercial airliner testifying to their encounter with a UFO. I have
also read the written testimony of other pilots, civilian and military,
testifying to their sightings of UFOs.
# 7. Most people would not report seeing a UFO for fear of losing a job.
Probably true. In the case of someone working for a government agency
or a defense contractor, this is probably more true than for someone
like me. At the worst, my boss and co-workers think I'm a bit around
the corner, which "ain't no big thing." But my job is not threatened.
However, if I was still working for a defense company and holding an
active security clearance, I would do just what I did--keep my big mouth
shut.
# 8. No authentic photographs have ever been taken of UFOs.
Definitely false. I almost put this one in all caps. I have photos,
including part of a film showing a UFO outside an in-flight aircraft.
It was this latter piece of film that made the case for me that UFOs are
real.
# 9. Persons who believe they have communicated with visitors
# from outer space are mentally ill.
???? I'm not sure how to rate this. I am sure that there are some who
are mentally ill. Still others are pubilcity seekers and con artists.
Still there are others whose veracity and probity I cannot find grounds
to question. I'm just not sure how to tell them apart sometimes. I
need more information and evidence.
# 10. The Air Force was told to explain all UFO sightings
# reported to them as natural or man-made happenings or events.
Definitely true. This would match standard procedure for matters
concerning national defense.
# 11. Earth has been visited at least once in its history by
# beings from another world.
Definitely true.
# 12. The government should spend more money than it does now to
# study what UFOs are and where they come from.
Probably true. I say it this way because I'd want to see the public
informed at every step--full disclosure of all facts and findings.
# 13. Intelligent forms of life cannot exist elsewhere in the universe.
Definitely and patently false. Even Sagan agrees that life can, and
probably does, exist elsewhere in the universe.
# 14. Flying saucers can be explained scientifically without any
# important new discoveries.
Definitely false. Any vehicle that can do what these craft do will lead
to new discoveries.
# 15. Some UFOs have landed and left marks in the ground.
Probably true. This could easily swing to a definite based on the
photos and reports I've read. But considering how easy it can be to
perpetrate a hoax I'll leave it as a probable for now.
# 16. Most UFOs are due to secret defense projects, either ours
# or another country's.
????? Again, I'm not quite sure how to answer this one. Untrained
observers could indeed mistake an experimental aircraft for a UFO. Some
of the UFO sightings around bases where experimental aircraft are tested
could be just that. However, I would think that the numbers, as a
percentage of the overall sightings, are very small.
# 17. UFOs are reported throughout the world.
Definitely true. Japan, Russia, Italy, Brazil, Belgium, England--just
to rattle off a few places.
# 18. The government has done a good job of examining UFO reports.
Please see my answer to items 3, 5 and 10. "Good job" is relative.
# 19. There have never been any UFO sightings in the Soviet Union.
Definitely false. The sightings of UFOs in the USSR is known. But in
that the USSR has been a very closed society for so long, it has been
hard to get information on their activities in this reagrd. I imagine
that we'll find the same thing in China once the Communists no longer
control the country in such a repressive and oppressive manner.
# 20. People want to believe that life exists elsewhere than on Earth.
Probably true. I think many do--but there are some who for various
reasons don't want to believe, or can't believe.
# 21. There have been good radar reports of UFOs.
Definitley true.
# 22. There is no government secrecy about UFOs.
Definitely false.
# 23. People have seen space ships that have not come from this planet.
Probably true. I'm not yet convinced that UFOs are space craft, though
that seems a more likely explanation. They could well be from
"some-when-else" rather than somewhere else. The evidence and
information is simply not sufficient to say one way or another what the
origin is.
# 24. Some UFO reports have come from astronomers.
Definitely true.
# 25. Even the most unusual UFO report could be explained by the
# laws of science if we knew enough about science.
Probably true. I'm close to saying definitely true. Our scientific
knowledge is still advancing. We've only now begun to understand the
quantum world. Our knowledge of the universe and it's formation is
still in its formative stages. We have yet to really understand gravity
and other forces.
# 26. People who do *not* believe in flying saucers must be stupid.
Definitely false. UFOs and other phenomena are outside the scope of
normal experience for most people. Had I not seen some of the things
I've seen or read some of the things I've read I might still be a real
skeptic.
# 27. UFO reports have not been taken seriously by any government agency.
Definitely false. They take them very seriously--but they don't want to
be found out doing so. After all, they have officially stated that
there is nothing to UFOs. ;-)
# 28. Government secrecy about UFOs is an idea made up by newspapers.
Definitely false.
# 29. Science has established that there are such things as
# "Unidentified Flying Objects."
If by "science" you mean the establishment, then I must say definitely
false.
# 30. Abduction reports are the result of hallucinations.
Again I am not sure how to answer this. I am sure that some of them
are. But there are others....
# Finally, what do you believe UFOs to be?
They are craft of unknown origin. In that they seem capable of flying
both inside and outside our atmosphere, I think that there is just cause
to think of them as being space craft. But I think it also likely that
they are more than that. I could well be that they are capable of
traveling interdimensionally, and maybe in time.
The film clip that I keep referring to shows a craft that is oblong like
a football, or an old cartoon cigar. Fore and aft are rounded
projections that remind me of radomes on aircraft. However, there are
no wings or other aerodynamic surfaces for lift and steerage. From the
film clip, the craft appears to be off the starboard side (right side)
of the airplane. Had this been a mere still photo, I probably wouldn't
have been so affected by it. But it is a film of a UFO in motion that
clearly shows the UFO. The film is not fuzzy like others I've seen. I
would judge the distance between the airplane and the UFO at around 100
feet.
I don't know what the UFO is. If it is an experimental aircraft, it is
the most bizaare craft I've ever seen, and it certainly doesn't follow
standard plane building methods. Even the unusual looking Flying Wing
and its progeny, the Stealth Bomber, follow accepted aerodynamic design.
So I must conclude that either the object in the film is a hoax--and a
very, very good one at that, or the object is what the film narrator
purports it to be--a UFO. I have played the video containing the film
clip in slow motion and studied it using a magnifying glass. I've done
stop motion on the video to study the object. I cannot detect anything
that leads me to believe the film clip is a hoax. So I conclude that
the object is for real. Unless the government has developed some new
and revolutionary way for aircraft to fly without aerodynamic surfaces,
the object is a real UFO.
Where it comes from, I haven't the foggiest idea. I can't even tell
what it uses for a propulsion system since there doesn't appear to be
any sort of engines or motors. It is moving too fast to be a
blimp--judging from the speed of the clouds past the window from which
the film was shot.
As for CE3 events, I must accept that the people who claim to have made
contact or been abducted are telling what they believe to be the truth.
I find that most of them are normal folks who have had a most bizaare
experience. I readily admit that there are con artists and
sensationalists among the CE3 folks, but I have to trust to human nature
that the phonies will trip themselves up somewhere along the way.
I believe that the government (maybe all of them) know a lot more than
they openly admit. But I'm not convinced of a government/alien
conspiracy--makes great science fiction and horror, but I doubt the
veracity of the story for a number of reasons. I do think that the
possiblity of a UFO crashing and the government recovering it is great.
I think that the Roswell Incident could well prove to be just that.
However, with a technology so advanced as the UFOs seem to possess, I
think it would be more like magic to us than science. To a stone-age
human, our flashlights would appear to be magic and not science. So the
government may be in the dark as to what these things are. The fear may
be that in admitting that there might be a crisis in confidence in the
government--so it's best to keep secret everything pertaining to UFOs.
(Hey, I'm just speculating on their reasons.)
Ta-ta for now.
Gene
********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************************
