Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 314
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 314
Thursday, October 11th 1990
Today's Topics:
Verifiable Sources
Verifiable Sources
Censors and Odd aircraft
Re: Mystery Teletype
_out There_
George Green
Re: _out There_
_out There_
Re: Primary Sources
Re: Mystery Teletype
Re: Mystery Teletype
Re: Mystery Teletype
Ed's Multi-witness Event
Re: _Out There_
Re: Verifiable Sources
Re: _Out There_
Verifiable Sources
Re: _out There_
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Brian Clark)
Subject: Verifiable Sources
Date: 7 Oct 90 16:33:00 GMT
> Question: What is the 'Ashtray Command'?
That was someone's little joke about the "Ashtar Command". There
are many (well, can't estimate number, but at least many sources)
people who claim to be in contact with space brothers who are
commanded by Ashtar. These "beings" communicate through direct
contact as well as "channeling" - the information they provide
centers around a protecting group of beings looking after the
people of Earth despite their seemingly stupid actions. In the
course of my research on Doomsaying I have read one of these
sources, "Project: World Evacuation" by "The Ashtar Command and
compiled by Tuella" (available through Guardian Action
International P.O. Box 27725, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84127-0725).
This book details the plans of the Ashtar Command to evacuate
most of the humans from the world when the "poles shift" in the
near future. Of course, this book was written in 1982, and the
"poles" haven't shifted yet.
Brian
--
Brian Clark - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael.Corbin@f110.n208.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Verifiable Sources
Date: 8 Oct 90 15:01:00 GMT
> That was someone's little joke about the "Ashtar Command".
> There are many (well, can't estimate number, but at least
> many sources) people who claim to be in contact with space
> brothers who are commanded by Ashtar. These "beings"
> communicate through direct contact as well as "channeling"
> - the information they provide centers around a protecting
> group of beings looking after the people of Earth despite
> their seemingly stupid actions. In the course of my
> research on Doomsaying I have read one of these sources,
> "Project: World Evacuation" by "The Ashtar Command and
> compiled by Tuella" (available through Guardian Action
> International P.O. Box 27725, Salt Lake City, Utah,
> 84127-0725). This book details the plans of the Ashtar
> Command to evacuate most of the humans from the world when
> the "poles shift" in the near future. Of course, this book
> was written in 1982, and the "poles" haven't shifted yet.
Very interesting. How does one continue to invest in such
matters when they obviously produce no fruit? What is your
opinion of the validity of this material, and for that matter,
channeling?
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@f110.n208.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: '23BMSDO' <23bmsdo@sacemnet.af.mil>
Subject: Censors and Odd aircraft
Date: 9 Oct 90 05:16:46 GMT
I don't believe that censoring this forum would do any good. My
solution when reading this stuff is to hit the 'PgDn' key when scanning
the text. This makes reading this interest group pretty quick since
95% of the text is trash and not really useful to anyone following
unexplained aerial phenomenon and doing research anyway. So let people
say what they will and keep your PgDn key warmed up!
----
Jim Speiser(Odd Aircraft) - A more valid question would be where have all
the UFO buffs been for the past 10 years while all these aircraft have
been developed. Ohhhhh...I forgot.....thats right we're still debating
the Gulf Breeze issue and following wild goose chases a'la Robert Lazar.
Say you haven't forgotten Lazar already have you????
Well I ranted and raved enough for my semi-annual posting....back to
Roswell to check into recent(last 3 weeks) sightings that went
unnoticed and unreported!!! Amazing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Clark.Matthews@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Clark Matthews)
Subject: Re: Mystery Teletype
Date: 9 Oct 90 00:39:00 GMT
> I'm glad you made that observation about Mayor Ed Grey.
...
> Note that Grey is going directly against the business
> wind, which I'd think would be political suicide. Why is he
> doing this?
> I think he has a hidden agenda, and hidden motives. It'd
> be rather interesting to find out those items.
It would be very interesting indeed, John. I share your feelings 100% and I
am frankly very curious about Mayor "Gray's" possible motives. When does he
run for election again? Was he opposed last time? How long has he been in
office? What are his business interests? Are they military-related?
Either services to Pensacola AFB or to servicemen & women off duty?
You see what I'm fishing for here: either an exposure to military
"pressure" or some sort of hidden support from military sources.
Another thing: Did you notice Gray's eyes during the "Unsolved Mysteries"
segment? They looked absolutely flat, glassy & fixed -- it's been my
experience that when someone is coached for a TV appearance, the person is
instructed to sit still, not shift their line of sight, and stick to their
own message even if they ignore the questions they are being asked.
Mayor Gray struck me as being over-rehearsed and possibly aware of how odd
and distasteful his message was. That's rather unusual in a public official
these days -- most of them will do just about anything to get on camera and
they're properly animated in the limelight.
What do you think? Have you met or seen the guy in person?
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Brian Clark)
Subject: _out There_
Date: 8 Oct 90 16:38:00 GMT
> What would be interesting is for Brian Clark to give us
> some information on what it is about UFOs that might appeal
> to people psychologically that causes such responses. The
Well, UFO's are often placed into a number of different areas
psychologically. I'll give a brief list of some of the positions
taken by psychology/psychiatry in terms of UFO's.
(1) "Control Hypothesis" - in a world where the individual feels
like they have little control over their own destiny, they create
the myth of UFO's to account for the control of *all* people.
Very similar to the middle ages, where magic/elves/fairies were
credited for everything from sickness to good luck.
(2) "Special Person Hypothesis" - similar to the previous, but
stemming from the desire of every person to feel like they are
something special. Therefore, you have people who are given
messages by UFO's (such as the Ashtar Command) or who have
special information that only they have seen (consipiracy theory
such as Cooper).
(3) "Jung's Collective Unconscious Theory" - UFO's are a
manifestation of great change in the collective unconscious in
the search for a new "archetype" to typify the world, seeing how
the "Jesus" archetype does not include any manifestation of evil
or femaleness. This is one was considered fringe science when it
was proposed in the 1950's by Jung and is still a pretty esoteric
explaination.
(4) "Aloneness Theory" - the desire for people to not feel like
they are alone. Several hundred years ago, there were still
strange new places on the Earth for people to explore, but now
the desire is for someone else in the universe to talk to, so the
myth evolves that we are not alone, that there are already "space
brothers" here with us.
(5) "Doomsayer Theory" - this is what I am researching now.
Basically, whenever the millenium or century changes, many people
become scared of the future and predict the "end of the world as
we know it". My research includes "contacts" with the Ashtar
Command (see a previous message) as well as Cooper's material.
This definately doesn't explain UFO experience as a whole, but
does touch on some parts of it.
(6) "Guided Psychosis Theory" - people do go insane, and with
the body of research/testimony on UFO's, people adopt that
experience as having happened to them. This results in insanity
that is slightly more acceptable than the others (which would you
be more likely to believe, that someone was sucked up by UFO's or
that someone has the ability to make anyone blink on T.V.
whenever they want to?)
Of course, there are many other theories, amoung them
"accomdation of knowledge" which says that when you see
something, you try to explain it as something you already know.
If try to put it into a pre-existing category in your brain -
some people see things and put it into the "UFO" category. This
one doesn't explain those people who believe in UFO's, but does
explain mis-sightings.
Hope this stirs up some discussion. Remember, I don't
necessarily buy into any of these theories, but am simply listing
what I have encountered. If anyone wants sources on any of
these, let me know and I'll dig for the book titles and such.
Brian Clark, University of Missouri
--
Brian Clark - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matt.Story@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Matt Story)
Subject: George Green
Date: 9 Oct 90 05:38:00 GMT
Don;
Have you heard of a guy named George Green and the Phoenix Journals ?
Is he legitimate ? He has been on a local radio program here in L.A.,
and I'm curious if you've heard of him.
Thanks
---Matt
--
Matt Story - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Matt.Story@f320.n207.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul.Faeder@p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Faeder)
Subject: Re: _out There_
Date: 9 Oct 90 04:39:01 GMT
In a message of <07 Oct 90 08:04:00>, Don Sudduth (1:207/320) writes:
>There are plenty of reasons to feed disinformation about a phenomena that
>the US Government claims doesn't exist! Just look at Bill Moore. The
>more they confuse the investigators with false leads, the "safer" they
>are! It's easy and it works!
Right! So if someone could prove that the Gov't did have a disinfo campaign,
wouldn't that help prove the existance of UFO's?
--
Paul Faeder - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Paul.Faeder@p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul.Faeder@p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Faeder)
Subject: _out There_
Date: 9 Oct 90 04:52:18 GMT
In a message of <07 Oct 90 09:20:00>, Michael Corbin (1:208/110) writes:
>It provides another good source of disinformation study material. Just as
>does the other stuff that we have been assaulted with of late, i.e., Bill
>Cooper and others.
OK; but what I'm asking is if there is enough evidence to prove that a
disinformation campaign exists. If so, perhaps this can be used as a backdoor
approach to proving the existance of intelligently controlled UFO's.
After all, why get involved in a disinformation camapign at all unless one
wants to confuse.
>In the last ten years, there has been a substantial increase in CE-IV
>reports. Just in the last year, and seen on ParaNet, there has been a
>tremendous increase in the activity of persons claiming to have
>experienced abductions or the witnessing of craft. In the southern
>United States, we have also seen an increase in reporting and the
>subsequent movement by these people to "religious" type groups who claim
>to be in contact with the entities. The interesting thing is that these
>cases do not fit the normal pattern observed and documented in previous
>years.
Remember, the South is the bible belt. Perhaps interpretation of a UFO
encounter depends upon one's beliefs. A "bible belter" may interpret it as a
religous event; a New Yorker would tell them where to go and a Pennsylvanian
would probably shoot at them.
I'm not stating this as fact, but there was no mention of a space brother
encounter in Night Siege which dealt with a UFO wave in lower New York state.
But perhaps this is due to the author's discretion.
> The unfortunate thing is that abductions have been
>so widely publicized that one wonders just how much of the reporting
>being done is the result of a reality or the result of hallucination
>brought about by subliminal hypnotic suggestion.
But what of the similar exoglyphs, drawn by different people? How can that
be explained?
--
Paul Faeder - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Paul.Faeder@p0.f0.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Burke)
Subject: Re: Primary Sources
Date: 8 Oct 90 02:50:00 GMT
Brian:
You've raised some good points here. This is the problem that
would result from the use of stricter guidelines: How much "good
stuff" would end up getting swept away with the "garbage".
I originally suggested such a guideline change so that there
could be some "objective measure" to preserve the "quality" of messages
posted here, without particular individuals' being picked on or "locked
out" for what may appear to be personal disputes.
As you've pointed out, there are enough people here who are
capable of asking "the right questions" (i.e. critical analysis rather
than "flames") to prevent these discussions from deteriorating into
mere "rumor mongering" or diatribe from those "annointed messengers" in
our midst. This, in fact, does seem to discourage people from posting
things that can more comfortably be discussed elsewhere, without any
sort of rational scrutiny from the forum participants.
-- John
--
John Burke - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Mystery Teletype
Date: 8 Oct 90 15:46:02 GMT
> RE: Model on a pole
> Tommy Smith, who claims to have worked with ED in makeing some
> hoax photos of the UFO says they did it by putting the model on
> the end of a stick
Which is precisely why the photos couldn't have been made that way.
The cutoff isn't a hard shadow. When it does appear, it's a darker
area, and it appears in all sorts of positions around the ring.
It doesn't appear in Ed's photos 6, 10 , 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, or some of Smith's own photos.
I think if there's been fakery it's at a much more complex level.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Mystery Teletype
Date: 8 Oct 90 16:06:03 GMT
> Have you ever talked to Dr. Robert Nathan of JPL regarding his
> findings on all of this?
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to, although I'm aware of most of
his points regarding the photos.
His suggestion that a pole blocked the light is logical, but then
he' stuck with explaining how a model on a pole could be moved about
in an almost perfectly smooth manner. Apparent altitude variation of
no more than one video scan line and smooth horizontal movement. No
jerky accelerations or decelerations.
I think we all have to agree that it would be impossible to walk
around with a model on a stick and not have altitude variations and
have the top of the stick sway around. Try it and see.
I can think of ways the video could be faked, but all involve rather
high-level video processing techniques and gear, and the gear would
cost big bucks. I doubt Ed would have the knowlege to do it himself,
even if he had the gear.
Actually, I can tie the whole thing together, pictures and video,
with a hoax theory that involves the use of a scanner, digital
manipulation and output to a film recorder, but I'm talking about a
much higher level of capability than, for instance, a Mac II or even a
Sun or similar workstation. The scanner needed itself would cost
several hundred thousand dollars.
Then, for the video, a high-level video production capability would
be needed.
Most major newspapers have this kind of gear, and so do most major
publishing houses. BTW, the Gulf Breeze Sentinel does *not*.
So, what I'm getting at is that if the photos are a hoax, I don't
believe Ed himself is anything more than the front man.
*continued*
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: Re: Mystery Teletype
Date: 8 Oct 90 16:11:04 GMT
So, who would have the resources and desire to hoax the material for
Ed?
Many, many corporations would have the resources, but I can't find
any desire in those directions. It couldn't be money, because if we go
with the digital theory the equipment etc. would easily run up to
maybe a million dollars. There wouldn't be any profit.
How about government/military?
If that's the case, then, the next question is what are they trying
to pass off as a ufo?
The military angle hangs together very well, though.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks)
Subject: Ed's Multi-witness Event
Date: 8 Oct 90 16:19:05 GMT
> I understand that there are actually two witnesses who both
> allegedly photographed the UFO.
There's Ed, "Jane," "Believer Bill," and Tommy Smith. All have
photos of Ed-type objects, although Smith claims that his are fakes.
Ed says that he knows the identity of Jane, but he's not going to
identify her because her professional life would vanish. He said it's
up to her to identify herself if she wants to.
He also refuses to identify Believer Bill, although he has done so
in the past. Ed told me that he thinks he may have hurt Believer Bill
by identifying him, so he won't do it any more.
At any rate, Ed did say Ray Griffin is Believer Bill. Ray denies
that he is Believer Bill, but has said that the BB pictures were taken
from his yard.
While Ray does say he gets contacts from something he calls Eckar,
he makes no claims of being a leader or wanting anyone to follow him.
Actually, if you talk with him personally he's more into feeding
starving children which, cult or not, is a pretty admirable goal.
jbh
--
John Hicks - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Burke)
Subject: Re: _Out There_
Date: 9 Oct 90 05:54:00 GMT
Paul:
Blum has admitted on several talk shows that he now realizes
that he was probably fed disinformation by his intelligence sources.
He has placed particular emphasis on the great lengths to which they
would go in order to accomplish this. He discusses this toward the end
of _Out There_.
He is presently working on a sequel. I'll bet that he'll go
into the disinformation angle quite a bit, this time around.
-- John
--
John Burke - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Burke)
Subject: Re: Verifiable Sources
Date: 9 Oct 90 06:12:00 GMT
(To James Roger Black)
Jim:
I agree with your proposed system of catagorizing sources.
Anyway, I don't know whether any such echo guidelines will ever come
about because most of us are of the opinion that they will probably
stifle the discussions here to an unfortunate extent.
As far as the Ashtray Command goes, it's a snide reference to a
non-existing entity, better known as the Ashtar Command. The
"teachings" of the A.C. are "channeled". Bob Girard of Arcturus Books
seems to know which humans are involved in publishing the A.C. stuff so
he could probably tell you a lot more about them.
-- John
--
John Burke - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG (John Burke)
Subject: Re: _Out There_
Date: 9 Oct 90 06:20:00 GMT
JS> Can it be said, then, that "THE" book has yet to be written?
Jim:
I dunno. Maybe we should check with Wendelle Stevens. :-)
-- John
--
John Burke - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: John.Burke@f20.n1011.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Brian Clark)
Subject: Verifiable Sources
Date: 9 Oct 90 14:15:00 GMT
> Very interesting. How does one continue to invest in such
> matters when they obviously produce no fruit? What is your
> opinion of the validity of this material, and for that
> matter, channeling?
Oh, I feel that both the Ashtar sources and channeling are are
totally valid - to my areas of interest. Realize that as a
psychologist I hold different definitions of "valid": in my mind
a source is both valid and interesting if they were created by
someone who truly believes that what they are creating is true.
Since there are many other people who believe in the Ashtar
Command and also claim to be in contact with them, then it
becomes a valid PSYCHOLOGICAL phenomen: that doesn't mean that
there really is an Ashtar Command or that there are spaceships
ready to swoop down to save us, any more than the presence of the
Bible proves that there is a God or that Jesus rose from the
dead. What is important psychologically is that people believe
it to be true. I'll post my theories on channeling in the
non-UFO discussion base a little later.
Brian Clark, University of Missouri
--
Brian Clark - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Brian Clark)
Subject: Re: _out There_
Date: 9 Oct 90 14:17:00 GMT
> Right! So if someone could prove that the Gov't did have
> a disinfo campaign, wouldn't that help prove the existance
> of UFO's?
Not necessarily. It could be proof that the U.S. Government is
testing super-secret aircraft and have decided that the "UFO
Roar" makes a nice cover.
--
Brian Clark - via FidoNet node 1:207/109
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Brian.Clark@f11.n289.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************************
