Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume 1 Number 403
Info-ParaNet Newsletters Volume I Number 403
Wednesday, May 15th 1991
Today's Topics:
(none)
10 bicyclists vanish in fog cloud
oops
Dan Quayle and Alternative Three
Re: Frank Edwards
TV shows on Paranormal subjects
Re: WALTER.SAL
Internet Mailings
Re: RECENT STUDIES
Re: Frank Edwards
Re: ALIEN ALLOYS
Re: (NONE)
Re: FRANK EDWARDS
WALTER.SAL
Re: WALTER.SAL
Re: WALTER.SAL
CROP CIRCLES
Zen Faulkes Article on ET Intelligence
Numerical Erratum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: (none)
Date: 13 May 91 05:35:35 GMT
From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
Subject: 10 bicyclists vanish in fog cloud
The following is from a Canadian tabloid of sorts. It is called the
News. It isn't like American tabloids in that it doesn't print stories
about Hollywood lust-affairs, I guess it just likes 'different' stories.
===> BEGIN QUOTING <===
News May 14, 1991
BIZARRE ENDING TO TEENS' RIDE FOR CHARITY
10 BICYCLISTS VANISH IN FOG CLOUD!
Ten teenage bicyclists on a charity fund-raising ride through the
countryside pedaled into a 150-foot fog bank - and vanished of the face
of the earth!
'They just rode into the thcik fog and never rode out,' said bewildered
witness Roland Saugey.
'There were no screams, no crashes, no anything. It was like something
out of the Devil's Triangle.
'The cops have searched for a mongh now and they haven't found
a trace of them - not one single clue.
The flabbergasted shool-teacher was one of eight adult vounteers assigned
to accompany the teens on their trek through the rolling hills outside
Marseilles, France.
'There wer about 80 kids on the trip altogether and they'd all signed
up pledges for AIDS research,' rattled Roland told a reporter.
'They rode off in groups of 10 and I followed the first bunch in my car,
just in case anybody ran into trouble. There were five boys and five
girls, and they were all looking forward to a nice long bike ride in the
country.'
But two hours out, the unsuspecting schoolkids rounded a curve, rode
into a fog bank - and disappeared forever.
'I saw them go into the fog ahead of me, and I drove in about 15 seconds
later,' Roland recalled. 'I turned on my lights because it was thick as
pea soup in there,, and when I came out I expected to see the youngsters
up ahead of me, pedaling away.
'But there were 10 or 15 people picking up bottles along the road and they
told us the kids never came out of the fog.
'The stuff lifted a little later, but we never found a trace of those kids
or their bicycles. It was like the earth just opened up and swallowed
them alive.'
And the cops are just as bamboozled as anybody else.
'There's no sign of foul play - there's no sign of anything,' said
dumbfounded detective Claude Bletner.
'We have searched every square inch of ground for miles around and there's
no indication any of those kids has ever been there.
'If it was one or two teenagers, you'd say maybe they ran away or were
abducted. But 10 able-bodied teenagers on bicycles, with a man in a car
right behind them - there's just no way.
'The other day, somebody said a spaceship swooped down and got them.
And the scary thing was, nobody laughed.
===> END OF ARTICLE <===
Must have been a meteorite.
Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ecn.purdue.edu!lush
Subject: oops
Date: 13 May 91 15:44:24 GMT
From: lush@ecn.purdue.edu (Gregory B Lush)
I just submitted a post in which I put in the wrong date
for the article I typed in. I'll have to check on the
proper date as that was what was given to me.
Greg (lush@ecn.purdue.edu)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu!jrblack
Subject: Dan Quayle and Alternative Three
Date: 13 May 91 15:46:17 GMT
From: James Roger Black <jrblack@shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu>
Vice President Dan Quayle, as one of the duties of his office, is
titular head of the U.S. space program. Here is what he had to say
recently about Mars:
We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water.
If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means
we can breathe.
Of course, this was in the same statement where he declared that 'Mars
is essentially in the same orbit' as earth--a revelation about orbital
mechanics that had somehow escaped the astronomers until now.
Consequently, while it is tempting to believe that Danny has been
briefed on Alternative Three, it is much more likely that he picked up
his information from a late-night viewing of 'Robinson Crusoe on
Mars'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Clark.Matthews@f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Clark Matthews)
Subject: Re: Frank Edwards
Date: 8 May 91 09:45:00 GMT
> I do believe Jim Speiser is right--the author was Frank
> Edwards. Jim is pretty <sharp> to have caught that boo-
> boo. But...Great Minds all think alike, and we all
> remembered a story (from HOW LONG AGO??)
Yes, but sometimes I think it's my personal curse to have a mind
like flypaper. Just kidding, wouldn't have it any other way :-)
Best,
Clark
--
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hpvclmd.vcd.hp.com!miked
Subject: TV shows on Paranormal subjects
Date: 13 May 91 19:34:55 GMT
From: Mike Dobbs <miked@hpvclmd.vcd.hp.com>
This week the networks are really loaded with shows dealing with the
paranormal. So... Get your VCRs ready.
Wednesday night on CBS (opposite of Unsolved Mysteries) at 8pm we have
'Haunted Lives: True Ghost Stories' - hosted by Leonard Nimoy.
Thursday night on ABC at 9pm, 'Miracles and Other Mysteries' - Four
unexplained events from San Diego, Portland (OR), Vietnam, and
California are re-enacted.
Friday night on CBS at 8pm, 'Visitors From the Unknown: UFO
Abductions' - James Earl Jones narrates re-enactment of several
documented encounters with extraterrestials.
--------
Mike Dobbs / Internet: miked@vcd.hp.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim Speiser)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 9 May 91 17:07:00 GMT
> I felt it necessary to present this material even though I don't agree.
> The last line says critics ignore the hundreds of other witnesses who
> report seeing the UFO. I still wonder why only one person can time after
> time get photos of the UFO while others get nothing? Did hundreds of
> others reports seeing the same UFO? Oh well in the interest of fairness
> and information (plus I didn't see it posted before) I had to send this
> out.
A million thanks, Pete. Fairness is what we're about.
Jim
--
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f37.n114.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin)
Subject: Internet Mailings
Date: 9 May 91 23:47:00 GMT
> Does anyone know why the Internet feed of Paranet UFO messages hasn't
> sent anything for about a week?
The feed has been operating correctly. The traffic coming back has been slow.
Mike
--
Michael Corbin - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: RECENT STUDIES
Date: 9 May 91 06:05:00 GMT
Hi Robert,
You bet I read The UFO Casebook (last summer). It was a terrific
intro to the subject. If you liked this book, you me1ight like The
UFO Conspiracy: The first 40 Years by Jenny Randles. No relation!
She's British, so has a slightly different slant to the English
language than what we speak (American) but it is also very interesting
too!
I'm currently reading The October Scenario bu Capt. Kevin Randle.
I'm getting all these "Randles" mixed up!
Happy reading, and thanks for the offer!
See ya,
Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: Frank Edwards
Date: 9 May 91 06:09:00 GMT
Hi Clark,
To quote: I sometimes think my mind is like flypaper...
Well, I sometimes think my mind is an "infinite sink" where all the
good stuff "sinks" to the bottom! :-)
Good to chat with you again,
Linda
--
Linda Bird - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Bird@paranet.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: ALIEN ALLOYS
Date: 7 May 91 21:55:18 GMT
Meteors can be loaded with magnesium, especially the bright green ones that
fly slower and for longer periods of time. Usually they don't leave anything
to research since they completely burn up crossing the atmosphere.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: (NONE)
Date: 7 May 91 21:58:37 GMT
Ah the Bentwaters Incident! That one I have seen before. Thanks for
improving my mind. <HNIC>
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: FRANK EDWARDS
Date: 7 May 91 22:01:43 GMT
Wasn't it Bloom County or was that Dogpatch TN? I'll leave this one alone
it's way out of my state.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: WALTER.SAL
Date: 7 May 91 22:12:50 GMT
The following represents a statement provided by Mr. Ed
Walters of Gulf Breeze, Florida and received on February
23, 1991. The original document contained various phrases emphasized by
underlining, bold print or
capitalizations. In the reproduction below, all emphasized
wording was CAPITALIZED.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A REVIEW OF STATEMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS PRESENTED
TO THE MEDIA BY REX AND CAROL SALISBERRY
(and recently reprinted on CompuServe)
ABSTRACT:
The nine page media release by Rex and Carol
Salisberry is based on factual omissions and partial quotes.
***********************************************************
1) With a copy of the Dektor Counterintelligence lie detector
test results in hand, THE SALISBERRYS ONLY QUOTED PART OF
THE ANALYSIS. The balance of the lie detector report
concludes:
"Ed's interview as such only shows one area that shows a
reaction which indicates something is wrong with what he
said and that is where he (Ed) took the photographs to the
newspaper and told the person (Mr. Cook) that he (Ed) was
only the errand boy. The rest of the interview, for what
its worth from the stand point of being able to say he (Ed
Walters) is being truthful about what he saw and what he
did, DOES NOT SHOW ANY REACTIONS TO CAUSE THIS
EXAMINER TO DOUBT HIS ANSWERS, ......."
2) On February 10, Charles Flannigan asked Ed Walters to take
a polygraph test. On February 18 Ed was interviewed and
tested. During the interview Ed supplied the names of Charles
Flannigan and Don Ware to the examiner so specific MUFON
questions could be asked. THE EXAMINER CONSULTED DIRECTLY
WITH MUFON. Ed passed the polygraph and one week later
Ed Walters was tested again and once again passed.
The Salisberry's account of the above February 18, 1988
polygraph test by Harvy McLauglin is a distortion. They imply
that MUFON was not involved in the testing and only quote a
piece of the examiners conclusion. The balance of the lie
detector report ignored by Salisberry concludes:
"MR. WALTERS TRULY BELIEVES THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS
AND PERSONAL SIGHTINGS HE HAS DESCRIBED ARE TRUE
AND FACTUAL TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY."
3) On June 19 Ed Walters was Psychological Stress tested
(lie detector) by Ronald Lauland of New Orleans, a leading
expert in the Southeast.
THE SALISBERRYS QUOTED THE FOLLOWING PARTIAL
PHRASE FROM MR. LAULAND'S STATEMENT, "......and the
questions were reworded for clarification....."
BASED ON THAT PARTIAL PHRASE, the Salisberrys
concluded that, "This gave Walters the opportunity to
carefully word the questions so that he could answer truthfully
without providing any meaningful results."
This distortion of the facts by the Salisberrys is easily
checked and confirmed that I did not
word or reword the questions. After a long interview, Mr.
Lauland told me that one test is all that was necessary for
him to determine my truthfulness. Based on the interview,
Mr. Lauland (not Ed) worded the questions to demand clear
cut affirmative answers most suitable to Stress Evaluation.
THE SALISBERRYS DID NOT TALK TO MR. LAULAND AND
AS WITH THE OTHER LIE DETECTOR TEST RESULTS, THEY
CHOSE TO OMIT MR. LAULAND'S CONCLUSION WHICH IS:
BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE TEST, IT IS MY PROFESSIONAL
OPINION THAT AS A CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR IN THE FIELD
OF PSYCHOLOGICAL STRESS EVALUATION (VOICE LIE
DETECTION), AS A COURT RECOGNIZED EXPERT IN THIS
FIELD AND AS A LICENSED ANALYST BY THE STATE OF
LOUISIANA, THAT YOU (ED WALTERS) WERE BEING TRUTHFUL
IN ANSWERING ALL OF THE RELATIVE QUESTIONS.
4) The Salisberrys have concluded that the reflection in
(the road shot) photograph #19 is "impossible". They
present as evidence a "simple demonstration" with a circle
of white paper 7 inches in diameter placed 185 inches away
on a flat table. They then conclude that the 7 inch circle
viewed from 5 inches altitude represents the shape
of the reflection that should be seen in Ed's photo #19 if the
photo is valid.
A. The Salisberrys ignored the pentagon shape that is
clearly seen in the bottom of the UFO in photo #11 and the
fact that light passing through a pentagon can make an angular reflection.
B. The Salisberrys "7 inch circle of paper" experiment
does not re-create the conditions at the road site (slope of
the road, etc.) and therefore proves nothing.
C. Whereas, on Oct. 30, 1990, eight test photos were taken
on Soundside Drive at the exact location of photo #19. At the
same time of day and with the same camera this re-enactment
was made using a 100,000 candle power light shining on
the road 185 feet down the road from the camera. THE TEST
PHOTOS SHOW DISTINCT ANGULAR REFLECTIONS ON THE
GRAY/WHITE GRAVEL ROAD SURFACE VERY MUCH LIKE THE
REFLECTION IN PHOTOGRAPH 19.
5) The Salisberrys describe how several UNNAMED PHYSICISTS
have validated their conclusion about the reflection being
impossible.
We discovered the identity of one of the unnamed physcists
and learned that he was told to "ASSUME ONLY CYLINDRICAL
SYMMETRY OF LIGHT EMISSIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE
OBJECT AXES OF SYMMETRY." THIS MEANS THAT HE WAS
TOLD BY SALISBERRY TO ONLY CONSIDER THAT THE LIGHT
SOURCE WAS A CIRCLE. The physicist was given no
information about the pentagon shape structure within the
bottom of the UFO, no information about the irregular road
top with it's gray/white rock surface embedded in the
asphalt and no information that the UFO may have been
farther down the road. (Salisberrys say that the road is
"black top" with no mention of it's gray/white surface.)
This unnamed physicist said that he has now talked to
Dr. Maccabee and agrees that there are many other considerations
that could cause such a reflection. Plus he said that he was
very upset at the release of his preliminary work to the
media. "This is not science, and I want nothing to do with
it," he said.
6) The Salisberrys boldly use Dr. Robert Nathan's name as
if he agrees with them. But when Dr. Maccabee consulted
with Dr. Nathan, he (Dr. Nathan) denied having endorsed
the simplistic "7 inch paper circle on a flat table" theory
and flatly stated that he had cautioned Salisberry to
remember that light can do strange things.
7) The Salisberrys said, "Arguments may be advanced that
a non uniform illumination might be able to produce the
reflections as shown in photo 19. The experienced analysts,
mentioned before, (I assume this to be one of the unnamed
people and not Dr. Nathan) assure us that such non uniform
illumination should still produce an elliptical pattern for
the reflection."
WHAT SALISBERRY IS SAYING HERE IS THAT IF A LIGHT
SHINES THROUGH AN ANGULAR SHAPE THEN THE REFLECTION
WILL BE ELLIPTICAL. A very bold statement but very wrong!
I tested the statement and when I shined a flashlight through
a star shaped hole cut into a piece of cardboard, I got a
star shape reflection and NOT an elliptical shape.
8) The Salisberrys say that on March 17, (Photo 36 L & R), that
"Frances did not emerge from the bushes at the same time
as Mr. Walters and hence had ample time to have hidden
away the model and other paraphernalia involved." THIS IS A
FALSE STATEMENT. THE WITNESSES CONFIRM UNANIMOUSLY
THAT FRANCES WAS BEHIND ED WITHIN SECONDS (five or ten
seconds at the most). Eight people, including Frances, stood
in front of Ed's truck headlights to watch the film develop.
<continued next message>
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 7 May 91 22:17:25 GMT
9) The Salisberrys say (in ref. to March 17, photos 36 L & R),
that "None of the witnesses recorded the numbers!" The
Salisberrys attribute this statement to Charles Flannigan. It
is a reference to the numbers on the back of the film. CHARLES
FLANNIGAN SAID "IT IS A COMPLETELY FALSE AND MISLEADING
STATEMENT."
As re-affirmed by the witnesses, the film packs were
opened by others and the boxes were saved. Each box has
a serial number. The serial number on the back of the film
matches the serial number on its box. The test photos taken
before the UFO sighting have the same serial numbers as the
UFO photos and the test photos taken after the UFO sighting
have the same serial numbers as the UFO photos and all of
the above have the same serial numbers as the box they came
from.
10) The Salisberrys have repeated a deception first distributed
by P. Klass in his effort to prove that the Thomas house plan
design is not the plan that is seen in the UFO model. The
living area and the slab area is clearly noted in the Model to
be 1740 and 2393. Great efforts were made by local officials
to find a house plan to match this square footage. THE ONLY
PLAN WITH THE SAME EXACT AREAS IS THE THOMAS PLAN
WHICH WAS DESIGNED ON SEPT. 6, 1989, ALMOST TWO
YEARS AFTER I TOOK THE UFO PHOTOGRAPHS IN 1987.
P. Klass selectively photocopied a tiny piece of the Thomas
plan that said "sinergy" and left out the many other design
and planning notes that show up on the plan. Sinergy was
was an option that the Thomases were considering, as were
the many other items so noted on the Thomas plan. My base
(standard) plan is always for a brick house with options being
added as required by the buyer.
The Salisberrys are also promoting another P. Klass deception
that portrays bits and pieces of numbers to be street address
numbers rather than the more obvious dimensional descriptions
on the plan. Also, the Thomas plan faced Shoreline Drive and
would have had a Shoreline Drive address.
11) The Salisberrys say that "photos 12 and 14 bear a marked
resemblance to the model found in the Menzer's attic."
THE ABOVE SALISBERRY STATEMENT IS FALSE. Of all the
photos, the UFO in photo 12 has a unique double bottom
image and clearly has a second, lower, level of "portholes."
Also photo 14 captures this second, lower, level of "portholes."
The model has more "portholes" than any of the Walters'
photos and it has no lower level of "portholes."
12) Ed Walters is on record describing the "horizontal"
lines during an interview in December 1988. He said,
"There were two lines running around the main body. One
line was above the "portholes" and one below the
"portholes." The portholes seemed to slide on the
horizontal lines as if they were headers and sills."
13) THE SALISBERRYS FALSELY SAY THAT IN FEBRUARY 1988
ED AND FRANCES WERE ACTIVELY SEEKING PUBLICATION OF A
BOOK.
The details of how and when Ed and Frances agreed to write
the book THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS is very clear. As the
news about the UFO sightings began to spread, many editors,
writers, and publishers began to pursue the rights to the
UFO photos. MUFON investigators talked with one New York
editor who flew to Gulf Breeze and made Frances and me
an offer. we refused all offers from these writers, editors
and publishers. Only after a year and a half of the continued
twisting of the facts by a few critics did we agree to go
public and tell our personal story.
A personal comment:
I normally do not take the time to read "reports" written
by critics because I find it astounding how they continue
to try to cover-up and distort the details of the local UFO
sightings. The above examples of partial quotes and
made-up "facts" are normal procedure in their efforts
to "muddy the water" for those unfamiliar with the
on-going local UFO sightings.
The Gulf Breeze sightings continue as scores of witnesses
gather to photograph and video tape the UFOs that frequent
the skys over Gulf Breeze. From a distance, people can
read the motivated "reports" from critics and believe
what they want, but here in Gulf Breeze seeing is believing.
Isn't it curious how hard the critics try to convince others
that what I saw and photographed was a hoax while
ignoring the hundreds of other witnesses who report seeing
the UFO? May God bless and guide us all (even the UFO
critics).
(signature)
Ed Walters
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Pete Porro)
Subject: Re: WALTER.SAL
Date: 7 May 91 22:21:58 GMT
I felt it necessary to present this material even though I don't agree. The
last line says critics ignore the hundreds of other witnesses who report
seeing the UFO. I still wonder why only one person can time after time get
photos of the UFO while others get nothing? Did hundreds of others reports
seeing the same UFO? Oh well in the interest of fairness and information
(plus I didn't see it posted before) I had to send this out.
--
Pete Porro - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pete.Porro@f414.n154.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Sheldon Wernikoff)
Subject: CROP CIRCLES
Date: 9 May 91 13:05:00 GMT
THE ARTIFICIAL PRODUCTION OF PLASMA-VORTEX QUINTUPLET CIRCLES
by
Sheldon L. Wernikoff
An important advance in experimental research on the circles effect has
resulted from observations of the motion of vortices in a gas-filled
chamber. The experiments concern the production of quintuplet circle sets by
the impact of plasma vortices upon an anode.
The experiments are conducted using Tesla-generated high voltage, low
frequency currents in an inert mixture of neon and argon gas. At certain
frequencies around 150 KHZ, plasma vortices form. The vortices are rendered
luminous by the excitation of the neon-argon mixture. The anode is spherical
in shape, approximately 40mm in diameter, and is fabricated of carbon-steel
alloy sheathed in a ceramic insulating capsule.
The vortices form spontaneously and glow brightly during their approach
to the anode. Upon striking it each vortex gives rise to a regular set of
five circles, the four satellite circles being located at equal distances in
the four right angle directions from the primary circle. The experiment has
been repeated many times. The first color photographs taken in October 1990
using ASA 3200 film suggest that the satellite circles are created at the
moment of impact by the ejection of four subsidiary vortices from the
primary one, but the exact sequence will not be known until the process has
been filmed by a high speed video camera. Good photographs have subsequently
been taken in monochrome at F1.2, 1/250, ASA 3200 pushed to ASA 12500.
This work helps to confirm the general ionized vortex theories
initiated by Dr. G. Terence Meaden for crop circle formation by natural
vortex processes in the atmosphere, in combination with the theory of George
Bathurst for quintuplet formation by satellite vortex ejection. Next, it is
hoped to film the life cycle of the vortices using video film.
(This article and photographs will be published in June 1991, in a
post-conference book of papers entitled "Circles from the Sky". I welcome
correspondence from interested parties)
Sheldon L. Wernikoff
9200 Niles Center Rd #2C
Skokie, IL 60076-1548 U.S.A.
TEL: 708-677-5154
FAX: 312-252-7574
--
Sheldon Wernikoff - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Sheldon.Wernikoff@p0.f150.n30163.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR
Subject: Zen Faulkes Article on ET Intelligence
Date: 14 May 91 05:37:15 GMT
From: Paul Carr <CARR@ASTRO.dnet.ge.com>
My comments on 'Getting Smart About Getting Smarts,' by Zen Faulkes:
In an article in the Spring 1991 issue of 'Skeptical Inquirer,'
Zen Faulkes (Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Victoria, B.C.) concludes
that the probability of intelligent life evolving on a planet which
is capable of supporting a biosphere is about 1E-9 (one in one hundred
billion). He contrasts this with the usual astronomer's assumption
that the fraction is closer to one, stating that some estimates are
even greater than (more than one intelligent species in the same
biosphere).
The perplexing problem that I have with this article is Faulke's
'derivation' of his 1E-9 fraction. It is his calculation of the
reciprocal of the number of species that have ever existed,
admittedly approximate. That is, of all the species of protozoa,
plankton, beetles, butterflies, fish, fowl, and all other fauna
that have ever existed, only one is, he judges,
'intelligent'(some people would say that the some Cetaceans
are also intelligent, and this _is_ germane, in my view).
All life, all adaptations, 'just happen,'
and so no one species or type of adaptation surviving is no higher
than any other. Not all ecological niches are fully exploited.
He points to S. Gould's book, WONDERFUL LIFE.
The Cambrian fossils found in the Burgess Shales are evidence that the
evolution of intelligence is not the end result of a trend - the
species that survived in the shale did so just by luck, not because
they were better adapted (I am interested in how
we can know how much better adapted one species was than another to
survive a mass extinction about 500 million years ago).
Therefore, we humans are a 1 in one hundred billion longshot, claims
Faulkes. In fact, he goes further to claim that our particular
adaptation - intelligence - is no more likely than this - no more
likely than the development of woodpecking or a sea otter using
a stone to open mussels. I must admit I don't follow this.
First, we are ignoring the key factor of _awareness_. The woodpecker,
for example isn't aware that she's exploiting an ecological niche, or
that her behavior is contributing to the success of her species. The
early men however, apparently were aware of whether their behavior was
useful for survival and adjusted it accordingly. Intelligence isn't
one adaptation, but countless adaptations. Intelligence doesn't exploit
one ecological niche, but many - permitting a single species to survive
in virtually every land habitat on earth, and even to create its own
habitats in space and under the ocean.
I would say that the sample space is smaller but is significant -
we know of exactly one biosphere, and that biosphere has evolved at least
one species of intelligent life. Some reasonable people think that
this biosphere has given rise to two or more intelligent species, but let's
discount that for the sake of argument. The best estimate we then have of
the probability of an intelligent species evolving is then 1.0 - the
'astronomer's' estimate. Admittedly, since that species is the
species of the estimator, as we discover more biospheres, that estimate
could decrease, but by nine orders of magnitude? My WAG on the order of
magnitude is 1E-1, but I could believe as low as 1E-4, because our planet
has such a nice, benign biosphere and has probably been lucky on the
number of mass extinctions (five, I think).
So, Faulkes' estimate of 1E-9 for the fifth factor in Drake's formula
can't be the last word for me. I need more evidence that the logical
connection is there. Does anyone see Faulkes' argument more clearly than
I do?
---Paul Carr
Internet: Carr@Astro.dnet.GE.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ASTRO.dnet.ge.com!CARR
Subject: Numerical Erratum
Date: 14 May 91 13:50:53 GMT
From: Paul Carr <CARR@ASTRO.dnet.ge.com>
In my earlier message on Zen Faulkes' article in SE, I erroneously stated
that 1E-9 is one in one hundred billion. Yikes! 1E-9 is,of course,
one in ONE billion. However, Faulkes considers this to be a generous
estimate.
********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************************
