Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 249
Info-ParaNet Newsletters, Number 249
Thursday, June 21st 1990
Today's Topics:
Re: UFO Questionnaire
Re: JFK Assassination
Re: GB Video
Re: Gulf Breeze Hoax?
Re: Stealth/Area 51
Re: SURVEY
Re: JFK ASSASS
QUESTIONS
Re: ParaNet Survey Part 2
Re: An Open Letter to Mr. Ed
An Open Letter to Mr. Ed
More Ill Breeze
ParaNet Alpha
Re: Paranet Survey Part 2
Paranet Alpha
Hudson Valley UFO -- A B-2?
Re: More Ill Breeze
Re: Paranet Survey Part 2
Re: ParaNet Survey Part 2
Re: More Ill Breeze
Re: SURVEY
Re: More Ill Breeze
Ed Walters/Gulf Breeze
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: UFO Questionnaire
Date: 16 Jun 90 07:47:00 GMT
Gene, the film clip of the UFO 100 feet from the plane -- where did you
come across that clip? Is it in one of the "standard" UFO
documentaries? IT sounds vaguely familiar but I can't quite place it.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: JFK Assassination
Date: 16 Jun 90 07:57:00 GMT
I don't necessarily disagree with any of what you said about the JFK
hit. They thing that I always come back to is that it is not
suprising, IMHO, that it was covered up regardless of what the real
facts are since ANY conclusion other then a conclusion of "lone gunman"
makes a great many of the parties involved look bad regardless of
culpability. The FBI, CIA, SS, none of them want to be cast in the
light of incapable of protecting the president from a planned and
organized hit, esp since there is reason to beleive there were some
warnings along those lines. Far better to simply conclude that it was
the work of a lone, deluded person that NO ONE could have foreseen.
And of course, even that isn't even true, but it is the best they could
do with the material at hand. In addition, it was to the benefit of
the perpetrators, whoever they were, to assist in fostering the belief
in the "lone gunman" theory since it means they will never be brought
to justice since the case is "solved".
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: GB Video
Date: 16 Jun 90 08:26:00 GMT
No, I don't think it is that the video was started and stopped. The
reflections of lights seem to move a lot in proportion to the movement
of the UFO. If the UFO was as far away as it appears the reflections
should only move about just a little, its just a optical lever arm.
If, however, the UFO is merely a reflection on a piece of glass that is
only a few feet from the camera, then the reflection from the UFO will
move a lot in relation to the "movement" of the UFO. That's is the
impressiion I get from many of the photos. All those reflections of
lights seem to be coming from someting very close to the camera. It's
just a gut level feeling same as the gut level feeling I get that
something just isnt right about most of the photos.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Tim.Hamewka
Subject: Re: Gulf Breeze Hoax?
Date: 16 Jun 90 18:31:13 GMT
Hmmmmmm...pretty convincing case against G.B. I'd say. Thanks for the
info. I understand that MUFON is standing behind G.B. 100%. If there's
anyone out there from MUFON, why not give your side of the story.
--
Tim Hamewka - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Tim.Hamewka@f725.n209.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Gene.Taub
Subject: Re: Stealth/Area 51
Date: 16 Jun 90 07:36:00 GMT
welp, while the Nuclear Ramjet was successfully fired, it wasn't very well
perfected. It ran *SOOOOO* hot that they had trouble keeping it together.
Also, it emitted so much radiation that it was really dangerous, esp. if
it were to not work, and crash somewhere...
Maybe someday they'll perfect it.
C-ya...
Ace
--
Gene Taub - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Gene.Taub@f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Ea.Richards
Subject: Re: SURVEY
Date: 15 Jun 90 13:43:18 GMT
Jim, you said, "UFO's are Unidentified Flying Objects for which we have no
satisfactory way of identifying no matter how hard we try."
You are absolutely correct, at least in the present level of our technology.
The body of information concerning the subject that has built to tremendous
proportion is a manifestation of man's inability to explain the
unexplainable, seemingly paralleling the courses in development of the
world's great religions.
Perhaps the unexplainable will be explained when the level of our science
allows it, and the hitherto unknown phenomena may turn out to be more
inherently simple than now imaginable.
If that happens, another such issue will arise, only to be explained as the
level of human sophistication rises to yet another new height.
--
Ea Richards - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Ea.Richards@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Pete.Porro
Subject: Re: JFK ASSASS
Date: 15 Jun 90 19:39:43 GMT
If there is a complete version of the Z-Film I'd like to hear about it since
the Govt. took the unp[rocessed film, and released the one with the frames
mixed or missing.
Speaking of films, I know there are many ufo films and videos out there. I
have not seen more than 10. Is there a list or a clearing house for maybe
circulating some of these from person to person for viewing? I saw the ad for
the Billy M films (three parts?) in an American Express flyer. The price was
too much for my budget, has anyone got some reviews of the best films or
videos to look for?
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f630.n283.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Zach.Harman
Subject: QUESTIONS
Date: 5 Jun 90 18:21:35 GMT
1. (3)
2. (1)
3. (I GUESS THEY HAVE, BUT THEY HAVEN'T INFORMED THE PUBLIC!)
4. (2)
5. (4)
6. (1)
7. (3)
8. (1)
9. (2, MENTALLY ILL, LOOKING FOR A FAST BUCK, OR TELLING THE TRUTH!!)
10. (3, SOME REPORTS IN BLUE BOOK WERE UNSOLVED.)
11. (4!!!)
12. (HOW DO I KNOW THE AMOUNT SPENT BY THE GOV'T?)
13. (1, HOW ABSURD.)
14. (1)
15. (3)
16. (2)
17. (4)
18. (HOW CAN I ANSWER? THEY DON'T INFORM US.)
19. (1)
20. (4)
21. (4, I HAVE A FRIEND, EX-NAVY, WHO SAW A RADAR UFO.)
22. (1)
23. (4)
24. (4)
25. (2)
26. (2, JUST LOGICAL AND CLOSED-MINDED.)
27. (AGAIN, HOW CAN I ANSWER?)
28. (1)
29. (4)
30. (2)
-
Finally, what do you believe UFOs to be?
-------------------------------------------------------
Difficult question. I have done research on both the Mars CYDONIA
region and its connection to Egypt and many other projects linking Earth to
extra-terrestrial races. I can say that I believe life exists elsewhere in
space, EVEN SAGAN SAYS THERE IS!! I can also say there are more realms than
space. Dimensional travel and other possibilities. At this point, I lean
toward the "Space Travel" theory.
--
Zach Harman - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Zach.Harman@p0.f630.n283.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Re: ParaNet Survey Part 2
Date: 17 Jun 90 05:51:00 GMT
-> Actually I don't mean to make the monolith - UFO
->connection *for* you; it was something I was thinking about
->yesterday.
That's okay, Paul. The connection's a valid one -- though I hadn't thought
of UFOs in the context of A.C. Clark's book 2001 and the mysterious
monolith, of course the analogy is precisely the same. Funny, but now that
I think about it, wasn't the Monolith in 2001 discovered in the crater
Aristarchus? That would be more than coincidence, since the mysterious
"lights" and shadows spotted by astronomers in and around Aristarchus are
one of the century's more persistent Fortean events.
Anyway, my thinking leans very heavily on the works of Dr. Jacques Vallee
and to a lesser extend Dr. Hynek. I really do think that this theory of
active conditioning is the most elegant explanation of the facts -- which
often make no sense otherwise.
To paraphrase Churchill, though, "UFOs are a puzzle wrapped in a mystery
shrouded by an enigma." The most confusing thing about them is imputing
some kind of motive to their activities. The only real motive seems to be a
persistent desire to show us that they are THERE.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Mr. Ed
Date: 17 Jun 90 07:26:00 GMT
Mufon has become so aligned with Ed that there is simply no objectivity
there anymore. It amazes me that the same people who would surely
laugh off a "genuine" photo of a unicorn even if "analysis" proved it
not to be a hoax are willing to accept as real hoaxy looking photos of
a UFO simply because no one can prove it a hoax photo or not. In al
the talk of the hundreds of other witnesses, not a one of them seems
able to get photos of anything but fuzzy lights. That alone is
instructive.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: An Open Letter to Mr. Ed
Date: 17 Jun 90 18:16:00 GMT
> Maccabee told me at NUFOC that he'd had Ed photograph common objects
> at specific distances in order to gain some idea of the size of the ufo.
> It's also detailed in his paper.
> This corroborates what Ed told the CI$ co.
I believe Ed said on CI$ that he had made several "models" for such purposes,
he said nothing about "common objects." Did he mention anything about having
made models to you?
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Speiser
Subject: More Ill Breeze
Date: 17 Jun 90 23:03:00 GMT
According to a phone call just received from Phil Klass, the Gulf Breeze case
has just unraveled further. Apparently the Pensacola News Journal is about to
report, or has reported, that an accomplice has confessed to helping Ed
Walters hoax the first batch of photos. The story so far is that Ed and the
unidentified teenager concocted a batch of UFO photos, which Ed then told the
youngster to take to the Sentinel. The boy decided against it, and retained
the photos. Ed then went to the Sentinel with his own photos. (Its possible I
have these events wrong, but this was my understanding from Klass). When the
boy saw the story on the model being discovered in last week's paper, he went
to GB Police Chief Jerry Brown, who told him to go to the News-Journal with
the photos he retained. Apparently Ed's reaction, predictably, was to claim
that either Klass, Smith or Boyd has paid the kid off to tell this tale. I
wonder if they have as much money as William Morrow - after all, the kid COULD
have taken such a batch of photos to a publisher and claimed they were real,
and made a LOT of money.
None of this is confirmed, mind you, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin
Subject: ParaNet Alpha
Date: 18 Jun 90 03:03:00 GMT
ParaNet Alpha is now back online.
The numbers are:
Voice: 714-982-2254
Data : 714-985-0666
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin
Subject: Re: Paranet Survey Part 2
Date: 18 Jun 90 03:11:00 GMT
> Anyway, my thinking leans very heavily on the works of Dr.
> Jacques Vallee and to a lesser extend Dr. Hynek. I really
> do think that this theory of active conditioning is the
> most elegant explanation of the facts -- which often make
> no sense otherwise.
I have not had the opportunity to read Vallee's book yet. Could
you elaborate on what his theory is regarding the phenomenon? Is
it perceived to be an outside -- of this world -- threat?
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Michael.Corbin
Subject: Paranet Alpha
Date: 18 Jun 90 03:14:00 GMT
> I was on Paranet Alpha today but I'm still confused. How do
> I get
> access to the files? Also, you have 2 addreses listed on
> the BBS. One
> in Colorado and one here in Las Vegas, but your number is
> in
> California. Where exactly can we contact you.
Sorry for the confusion, Tim. I have not fixed everything yet,
but it should all be straightened out in a few more days.
I have no connection to Colorado at all anymore. I still have a
post office box in Las Vegas as I paid for six months, can't get
a refund, and decided to use it for what it is worth. So, you
can get mail to me there. If you want to call me voice, I am at
714-982-2254. That is in Los Angeles.
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f1.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Hudson Valley UFO -- A B-2?
Date: 18 Jun 90 04:37:00 GMT
** TONY GONSALVES' "STEALTH" UFO THEORY
RECEIVES WIDE NEW YORK PRESS COVERAGE **
Press Reports Characterize the Hudson Valley UFO as a B-2 Bomber
Special to ParaNet
By Clark Matthews
New York, N.Y. (June 17) -- The published theories of Rhode Island UFO
researcher Tony Gonsalves got an unexpected -- and perhaps unwelcome --
boost today. "Spy" magazine and New York-based WCBS NewsRadio today
characterized the low-flying, boomerang-shaped Hudson Valley UFO as a
B-2 Stealth Bomber based at Stewart Air Force Base in upstate Newburgh,
New York.
In Gonsalves' published articles on the Hudson Valley UFO, he claims
that there are actually two Stealth bombers: the publically announced
aircraft demonstrated in California -- and an "actual" B-2 with much
more startling and surreptitious capabilities. It is the second,
"actual" B-2 that Gonsalves claims prowls the night skies of the Hudson
River Valley.
But in today's press coverage and interviews, Gonsalves simply claimed
that the mysterious object that has confounded witnesses, police and
aviation authorities in upstate New York is an Air Force B-2 bomber. In
an interview with WCBS radio, Gonsalves said that the UFO followed
flight patterns consistent with origins at Stewart A.F.B. "It always
appears from the west, and then disappears in a westerly direction," he
said. What's more, its size, shape and performance characteristics "all
closely parallel" what we know about the top-secret B-2 bomber.
If Gonsalves' theory is true, the B-2 bomber possesses the potential of
a truly revolutionary secret weapon. The reason? Among other things,
the Hudson Valley UFO has been observed to stop in midflight, hover and
even fly backward.
For its part, the Air Force admitted nothing. Instead, an Air Force
spokesperson repeated the complaint that the UFO is really a formation of
flying hoaxers equipped with flashlights.
The large, delta-winged Hudson Valley UFO -- known to upstate New York
locals as "Big Bertha" -- has haunted the region intermittently for the
past 10 years. It has startled nighttime travelers in New York's
Westchester, Putnam, Orange and Dutchess Counties, intruded into the
airspace of the Indian Point nuclear generating facility, and made
incursions into posh Fairfield County, Connecticut, as well. "Big
Bertha's" most notable appearance stopped evening rush-hour traffic on a
major highway next to the Croton Reservoir and left hundreds of
dumbfounded witnesses in its wake -- including several senior executives
from IBM's nearby corporate headquarters at Armonk, N.Y.
Air Force and civil avaiation authorities have consistently dismissed
the Hudson Valley UFO as a hoax engineered by a group of night-flying
ultralight aircraft enthusiasts based at Westchester County Airport.
But witnesses often hotly dispute this interpretation -- one IBM exec
said "I know what I saw and that damn thing was a spaceship". In
addition, the F.A.A. and Air Force have shown little interest in
apprehending the ultralight hoaxers, despite the concerns voiced by
commercial avaition companies and corporate jet pilots -- all of whom
fly into Westchester County Airport at night.
An actual videotape of the object, taken by witnesses, shows a fixed
pattern of lights traveling slowly upwind at treetop level in complete
silence.
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Re: More Ill Breeze
Date: 18 Jun 90 04:47:00 GMT
'Tis an ill wind indeed...
First Meyer and now this. Even more alarming, why doesn't any of this
surprise me?
Virtually all of us regulars here have voiced deep concerns about Mr. Ed's
photos and veracity at one time or another -- if memory serves. I mean, the
damn things looked fake right from the start to me and I refused to buy the
man's book as a result. I simply didn't believe it -- never did.
No condemnation here -- for Dr. Maccabee or anyone else -- but how could so
many people be so gullible? How could we be so credulous?
Perhaps now, as we race to do damage control, we should all think about how
we could avoid something like this in the future?
I mean, we have two of these things now -- Meyer & Ed. Both con men, both
with criminal backgrounds, both laughing all the way to the bank. Both
succeeded only, I repeat ONLY, because they enlisted the support & advocacy
of respected UFOlogists. And in one case, a premier American UFOlogy group.
How do we avoid fiascos like this in future?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f0.n9.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Clark.Matthews
Subject: Re: Paranet Survey Part 2
Date: 19 Jun 90 04:04:00 GMT
Hi Michael. Nice to be typing at you just like the old days!
> Could you elaborate on what his theory is regarding the
> phenomenon?
Vallee's theory is so simple that it fools people sometimes. I've always
felt that it is MOST like Marshall McLuhan's theory of broadcast media:
"The medium IS the message."
So, I think Vallee's saying "UFOs are their own message." Their purpose is
to appear on deserted roads, flatten crops, harass the military, abduct
people (and perform bizarre, upsetting examinations that the victim is bound
to remember). They are here to get attention. The reason for their
existence is for people to believe in sophisticated, advanced alien life
forms.
And that's all. There is no MOTIVE for UFOs being here. Many sightings
make no sense if viewed in terms of "motive". Why land on an alien planet,
have 10 (count 'em, TEN) crewmen debark with little shovels and dig holes in
the ground? Why pick the center of a deserted road in the middle of nowhere
to land and make repairs? They are here for us to see them. And for some
reason, they want us to think ... well, what most people think about UFOs.
Vallee's book Confrontations does not alter this hypothesis. But it DOES
put the phenomenon in a more sinister and amoral light. In South America
(and possibly other places), he records fatalities as a result of UFO
contacts. Some of them are hideous. All of them are among people who
routinely hunt or otherwise catch, snare, track, or kill animals for either
food or money. In many cases (most, really), the behavior of the UFOs
toward the victims is almost IDENTICAL to the behavior of the victims toward
their own animal prey. The simile is quite obvious and unavoidable.
Similar, non-fatal depredations have happened to Brazilian squatters who
routinely burn down a patch of rain forest, farm it into a dustbowl, and
move on to wreck another plot of land.
At the top of the last paragraph I said the new book puts UFOs in an
"amoral" light -- and here I am roundly condemning the violent, ignorant,
destructive Brazilian campesinos. Hmmmm. As Sherlock Holmes says, "I
suppose there's some spark of immortality in all of them". Yet what they're
doing collectively and individually is probably very wrong and dangerous for
all of us. "Amoral" for killing a few jaguar hunters? We'd have to say so.
But the UFOs have no problem with it.
Anyway, Mike, I highly recommend the book -- in fact, all his books.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@f0.n9.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f70.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Charles.Mcelhinney
Subject: Re: ParaNet Survey Part 2
Date: 18 Jun 90 14:44:00 GMT
CM> That's okay, Paul. The connection's a valid one -- though
CM> I hadn't thought of UFOs in the context of A.C. Clark's
CM> book 2001 and the mysterious monolith, of course the
CM> analogy is precisely the same. Funny, but now that I think
CM> about it, wasn't the Monolith in 2001 discovered in the
CM> crater Aristarchus? That would be more than coincidence,
No, the monolith was found in Tycho. Hence the name "TMA-1." They
often referred to it as "The Tycho Monolith."
--
Charles Mcelhinney - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Charles.Mcelhinney@f70.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG!Paul.Faeder
Subject: Re: More Ill Breeze
Date: 19 Jun 90 06:16:04 GMT
In a message of <17 Jun 90 21:47:00>, Clark Matthews (1:114/37) writes:
>How do we avoid fiascos like this in future?
We need to get scientists/science involved. Although I'm sure that there are
some very highly educated people investigating UFO's; they aren't scientists.
I get the impression that our Gov't would rather leave UFO's in the hands of
laypersons so we can muck it up. Not to disparage the excellent work of some
individuals, but, I think we are our own worst enemy when it comes to the
investigation and study of UFO's. And I think this is exactly why the Gov't
doesn't allocate funds to do proper research.
--
Paul Faeder - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Paul.Faeder@p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: SURVEY
Date: 19 Jun 90 01:57:00 GMT
Should we be calling it unexplainable or inexplicable? I think we will
someday have the answer; in fact, we could probably have it now if we
were willing to spend some money on the problem.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Jim.Delton
Subject: Re: More Ill Breeze
Date: 19 Jun 90 02:10:00 GMT
>>How do we avoid fiascos like this in the future??
I doubt they will be avoided. When the "premier UFOlogy group"
allows itself to become a participant and cheerleader it is unlikely
that such fiascos can be avoided. As long as the investigators refuse
to let the evidence speak for itself but insist on coloring their
analysis with possibly self-serving rationalizations from the
witnesses for every negative that comes along I have no doubt that "we"
will remain ripe for the next one that comes along. The key is, cover
your ears and eyes, skepticism; not negativism, but rational skepticism
so that a case stands on it's own merits, not on the reputation of the
witnesses and investigators.
--
Jim Delton - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Delton@p0.f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paranet!f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Hicks
Subject: Ed Walters/Gulf Breeze
Date: 17 Jun 90 18:17:00 GMT
> According to a gent at the paper I talked with today, that is
> simply not true. The paper will allow anyone who asks to examine
> the photos. He also said it is NOT true that the paper was
> "tipped off" as to the existence of a model.
We're both getting conflicting information from people whose
statements should pretty much agree.
I think I'm going to back off on this until I can run it down in
person in a couple of weeks. If I can hold my..er..fingers.
Be sure to look at all the info you can find relating to the
pictures Ed took at Shoreline Park when the other folks pretended to
leave.
Known items are that the filmpacks couldn't have been switched, the
frame counters were on the correct numbers, the film comes out
immediately after the shutter fires, and there's then no way to slow
or stop development. There's also no way to fiddle the frame counters.
That's the picture no one can figure out how to hoax.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:30163/0
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.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************************
